Stop whining and get with The Progromme

Stop whining and get with The Progromme

Monday, September 22, 2008

The Militarization of American Police Departments

"The Sovereignty Papers" Number 3, August 3, 2006

"The Militarization of American Police Departments"

By Greg Evensen, Author of "The Sovereignty Papers".

As a former state police trooper, I can state unequivocally, that I oppose the move away from local policing to heavily armed "we’re all part of the same national quasi-military police force" unofficial policy. You need look no further than New Orleans after Katrina. You could watch California Highway Patrol and many other agencies going door to door, disarming innocent civilian victims of gangs and criminals. Police officers were on a rampage to confiscate firearms from those people trying to protect themselves. Observing this was to incite a first class riot in my home.

It was bad enough to watch these poor helpless, but courageous civilians, defending themselves against absolute terrorists who spoke "Ebonics" and Spanish. It was horrendous to watch the suffering of old men and women abandoned by families or simply unable to leave before the storm hit. But it was simply heartbreaking to see beefy, skin-headed officers prying a shotgun out of the hands of men and women whose only "crime" was that they tried to keep themselves alive while the "officers" ran for the hills.

We have become accustomed to standing quietly on the sidelines while our local Police Chiefs and Sheriffs have accepted huge amounts of federal dollars and military equipment for their special response units all under a variety of sinister names and special standing orders. Once they took the cash, they were handcuffed to the Feds for whatever future "mission" some whacked out Special Agent from the XYZ Bureau dreamed up for a little publicity (like Waco) and "show of force." This is to soften up the American public in case they had thoughts of fending for themselves or decisively telling these servants that they weren’t needed, thank you. But then, a well armed citizenry doesn’t fit the UN model of a disarmed nation bowing before the machine-gun toting black clad soldiers of the Omaha, Atlanta or Dayton police departments. Let’s see, black uniforms, coal bucket style helmets, machine-guns at every corner-----I feel a time trip coming on to Berlin in 1942.

The excuse being used for starting, equipping and using these "teams" is that we are under siege and cannot let common criminals (99.65% of the unlawful element in society) take down our cities. The other .35% of the safety and security issue in the USA is found in sleeper cells and devotees of world class Jihad’s. These are thugs truly worth special response teams from federal agencies finding and destroying their efforts before they ignite the big blast.

I simply do not understand the thinking of upper level criminal justice system masters who have not recently, if ever, read their US or state constitution in regard to the public’s right to privacy and self-protection. Issues regarding the 2nd amendment, due process, limited government, and how far we have strayed from the Founder’s belief in the integrity of the citizen and his/her role in defending liberty, while keeping government agents in check, are well known and I will not opine about them again.

Suffice it to say that as a nation, we have stood by while the police forces of the USA have become a force that projects intimidation, fearful responses from the community, and a reputation for excessive force regardless of the need, making even routine contact with the public a major ordeal.

I have not had my head in my uttermost parts during the past several years. I know that the world is a changed and dangerous place. However, I simply do not believe that even if WWIII erupted tomorrow, we would somehow be better off in our devastated cities by the presence of Anchorage PD in Detroit, Michigan. Instead of hyper-reliance on anything state or fed, we should be equipping ourselves and our local neighborhoods for dealing with major security and safety issues OURSELVES. Any major event is going to see an immediate breakdown of law and order. Officers normally committed to protecting the public, are going to be out of action from injury death, or an overwhelming desire to protect (understandably) their own families, and an absence of police leadership at all levels. If we are really following the New Orleans example, we will see rogue officers that will make the common criminal seem like an old lost friend come for a visit.

My point is this. As a nation, we have lost our way on many fronts from the wisdom of our Republic builder’s dreams for a free, independent and courageous American people, who are able to handle most crises situations fairly well. What happened to "Peace Officers?" You know, the cop everyone knew, liked and respected because of his courage, devotion to duty and the citizens of the community. We are moving daily toward reviving the demons of the Waffen SS. This must stop. We have become nursery school children herded by our "parent" government to rely on WHATEVER is said by WHOMEVER says it, and by GOD you will obey, RIGHT NOW or else!

In all fairness, and to my many friends in law enforcement who know what I am saying is true and ominous, I thank you sincerely for a job well done each and every day you report for roll call.

If you like a militarized police state future, fine. I hope your chains are not chafing your wrists and ankles too much. However, for me, that is not acceptable. I choose to work toward my destiny and that of a free America within the constitution for sure, but without the unconstitutional agencies, decrees, laws, judge’s rulings, decrees from treasonous bureaucrats, threats and intimidation from goons masquerading as local and state policy makers or brain-washed, gun-toting morons like the New Orleans Chief of Police who ordered honest civilians to surrender to hell on earth—unarmed.

The time is coming fast when millions of Americans who still understand what this colossal struggle is all about here in the United States and around the world, have severe choices that are going to be required. The UN will not simply allow the US to continue as a sovereign nation when the rest of the world is under world government domination. That is not paranoia. That is simply the deduction one gets from reading the liberal newspapers. Your future actions will determine whether you will go to the re-education camp, or the internment camp for "troublemakers" (read that constitution supporters). Did you really believe that those conservative republicans and "little guy" protecting democrats were going to keep you from all harm, remember this: They are the ones who allowed this situation to occur.

It will be far too late to ever be free. It will never happen again that a liberty-minded people can set the building blocks for a prosperous nation, under God, and united to stand against the real evil in the world. The very people we armed and organized into this "national police force" and relied on to protect us, have become the new enforcers for an international banking, business, and centrally controlled world. The UN just might allow us to live on a few acres specified by Agenda 21, and these agents would be safe to force us into captivity because of world gun control. Gun control is people control. Just ask the California Highway Patrol and the "good guys" in New Orleans.

Greg Evensen, Americans for Constitutional Enforcement
National Director and Chair for the April 12-14, 2007, Kansas City "Heartland USA (United for a Sovereign America") Summit.
Greg is author of "The Sovereignty Papers." Articles may be used for any reprint as long as credit is given to the writer.

Cops Beat man in Wheelchair

Woman Calls for Help. Stripped, Humiliated in Jail

RNC Violent, senseless actions by Cops

Thursday, August 21, 2008

"Big Brother" Presidential Directive: "Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security

by Michel Chossudovsky

The latest Big Brother police state measure emanating from the Bush administration, with virtually no press coverage, is NSPD 59 (HSPD 24) entitled Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security [Complete text of NSPD 59 (HSPD 24) in Annex below]

NSPD is directed against US citizens.

It is adopted without public debate or Congressional approval. Its relevant procedures have far-reaching implications.

NSPD 59 goes far beyond the issue of biometric identification, it recommends the collection and storage of "associated biographic" information, meaning information on the private lives of US citizens, in minute detail, all of which will be "accomplished within the law":

"The contextual data that accompanies biometric data includes information on date and place of birth, citizenship, current address and address history, current employment and employment history, current phone numbers and phone number history, use of government services and tax filings. Other contextual data may include bank account and credit card histories, plus criminal database records on a local, state and federal level. The database also could include legal judgments or other public records documenting involvement in legal disputes, child custody records and marriage or divorce records."(See Jerome Corsi, June 2008)

The directive uses 9/11 as an all encompassing justification to wage a witch hunt against dissenting citizens, establishing at the same time an atmosphere of fear and intimidation across the land.

It also calls for the integration of various data banks as well as inter-agency cooperation in the sharing of information, with a view to eventually centralizing the information on American citizens.

In a carefully worded text, NSPD 59 "establishes a framework" to enable the Federal government and its various police and intelligence agencies to: "use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner, while respecting their information privacy and other legal rights under United States law."

The Directive recommends: "actions and associated timelines for enhancing the existing terrorist-oriented identification and screening processes by expanding the use of biometrics".

"Other Categories of Individuals"

The stated intent of NSPD 59 is to protect America from terrorists, but in fact the terms of reference include any person who is deemed to pose a threat to the Homeland. The government requires the ability:

"to positively identify those individuals who may do harm to Americans and the Nation... Since September 11, 2001, agencies have made considerable progress in securing the Nation through the integration, maintenance, and sharing of information used to identify persons who may pose a threat to national security.

The Directive is not limited to KSTs, which in Homeland Security jargon stands for "Known and Suspected Terrorists":

"The executive branch has developed an integrated screening capability to protect the Nation against "known and suspected terrorists" (KSTs). The executive branch shall build upon this success, in accordance with this directive, by enhancing its capability to collect, store, use, analyze, and share biometrics to identify and screen KSTs and other persons who may pose a threat to national security.

The executive branch recognizes the need for a layered approach to identification and screening of individuals, as no single mechanism is sufficient. For example, while existing name-based screening procedures are beneficial, application of biometric technologies, where appropriate, improve the executive branch's ability to identify and screen for persons who may pose a national security threat. To be most effective, national security identification and screening systems will require timely access to the most accurate and most complete biometric, biographic, and
related data that are, or can be, made available throughout the executive branch."

NSPD 59 calls for extending the definition of terrorists to include other categories of individuals "who may pose a threat to national security".

In this regard, it is worth noting that in the 2005 TOPOFF (Top officials) anti-terror drills, two other categories of individuals were identified as potential threats: "Radical groups" and "disgruntled employees", suggesting than any form of dissent directed against Big Brother will be categorized as a threat to America.

In a previous 2004 report of the Homeland Security Council entitled Planning Scenarios, the enemy was referred to as the Universal Adversary (UA).

The Universal Adversary was identified in the scenarios as an abstract entity used for the purposes of simulation. Yet upon more careful examination, this Universal Adversary was by no means illusory. It included the following categories of potential "conspirators":

"foreign [Islamic] terrorists" ,

"domestic radical groups", [antiwar and civil rights groups]

"state sponsored adversaries" ["rogue states", "unstable nations"]

"disgruntled employees" [labor and union activists].

According to the DHS Planning Scenarios Report :

"Because the attacks could be caused by foreign terrorists; domestic radical groups; state sponsored adversaries; or in some cases, disgruntled employees, the perpetrator has been named, the Universal Adversary (UA). The focus of the scenarios is on response capabilities and needs, not threat-based prevention activities." (See Planning Scenarios )

Under NSPD 59, biometrics and associated biographical information will be used to control all forms of social dissent.

Domestic radical groups and labor activists envisaged in various counter terrorism exercises, constitute in the eyes of the Bush administration, a threat to the established economic and political order.

In the text of NSPD 59, these other categories of people have been conveniently lumped together with the KSTs ("known and suspected terrorists"), confirming that the so-called anti-terror laws together with the Big Brother law enforcement apparatus and its associated data banks of biometric and biographic information on US citizens are intended to be used against all potential domestic "adversaries" including those who oppose the US led war in the Middle East and the derogation of the Rule of Law in America.

It is worth noting that NSPD 59 was issued on June 5, 2008, 4 days prior to the publication of Rep. Dennis Kucinich's Articles of Impeachment of President George W. Bush by the House of Representatives. Article XXIII of the Articles Impeachment underscore how in derogation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents the military from intervening in civilian law enforcement, President Bush:

"a) has used military forces for law enforcement purposes on U.S. border patrol;

b) has established a program to use military personnel for surveillance and information on criminal activities;

c) is using military espionage equipment to collect intelligence information for law enforcement use on civilians within the United States"

In Article XXIV the president is accused on Spying on American Ctizens without a court-Ordered Warrant , In Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment.



Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security [Complete text of NSPD 59 (HSPD 24) in Annex below]

National Security Presidential Directive and Homeland Security Presidential Directive


SUBJECT: Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security


This directive establishes a framework to ensure that Federal executive departments and agencies (agencies) use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner, while respecting their information privacy and other legal rights under United States law.


(1) The executive branch has developed an integrated screening capability to protect the Nation against "known and suspected terrorists" (KSTs). The executive branch shall build upon this success, in accordance with this directive, by enhancing its capability to collect, store, use, analyze, and share biometrics to identify and screen KSTs and other persons who may pose a threat to national security.

(2) Existing law determines under what circumstances an individual's biometric and biographic information can be collected. This directive requires agencies to use, in a more coordinated and efficient manner, all biometric information associated with persons who may pose a threat to national security, consistent with applicable law, including those laws relating to privacy and confidentiality of personal data.

(3) This directive provides a Federal framework for applying existing and emerging biometric technologies to the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of data in identification and screening processes employed by agencies to enhance national security, consistent with applicable law, including information privacy and other legal rights under United States law.

(4) The executive branch recognizes the need for a layered approach to identification and screening of individuals, as no single mechanism is sufficient. For example, while existing name-based screening procedures are beneficial, application of biometric technologies, where appropriate, improve the executive branch's ability to identify and screen for persons who may pose a national security threat. To be most effective, national security identification and screening systems will require timely access to the most accurate and most complete biometric, biographic, and related data that are, or can be, made available throughout the executive branch.

(5) This directive does not impose requirements on State, local, or tribal authorities or on the private sector. It does not provide new authority to agencies for collection, retention, or dissemination of information or for identification and screening activities.


(6) In this directive:

(a) "Biometrics” refers to the measurable biological (anatomical and physiological) and behavioral characteristics that can be used for automated recognition; examples include fingerprint, face, and iris recognition; and

(b) "Interoperability" refers to the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged.


(7) The ability to positively identify those individuals who may do harm to Americans and the Nation is crucial to protecting the Nation. Since September 11, 2001, agencies have made considerable progress in securing the Nation through the integration, maintenance, and sharing of information used to identify persons who may pose a threat to national security.

(8) Many agencies already collect biographic and biometric information in their identification and screening processes. With improvements in biometric technologies, and in light of its demonstrated value as a tool to protect national security, it is important to ensure agencies use compatible
methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric information.

(9) Building upon existing investments in fingerprint recognition and other biometric modalities, agencies are currently strengthening their biometric collection, storage, and matching capabilities as technologies advance and offer new opportunities to meet evolving threats to further enhance national security.

(10) This directive is designed to (a) help ensure a common recognition of the value of using biometrics in identification and screening programs and (b) help achieve objectives described in the following: Executive Order 12881 (Establishment of the National Science and Technology Council); Homeland Security Presidential Directive‑6 (HSPD‑6) (Integration and Use of Screening Information to Protect Against Terrorism); Executive Order 13354 (National Counterterrorism Center); Homeland Security Presidential Directive‑11 (HSPD‑11) (Comprehensive Terrorist Related Screening Procedures); Executive Order 13388 (Further Strengthening the Sharing of Terrorism Information to Protect Americans); National Security Presidential Directive‑46/Homeland Security Presidential Directive‑15 (NSPD-46/HSPD-15) (U.S. Policy and Strategy in the War on Terror); 2005 Information Sharing Guidelines; 2006 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism; 2006 National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel; 2007 National Strategy for Homeland Security; 2007 National Strategy for Information Sharing; and 2008 United States Intelligence Community Information Sharing Strategy.


(11) Through integrated processes and interoperable systems, agencies shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, make available to other agencies all biometric and associated biographic and contextual information associated with persons for whom there is an articulable and reasonable basis for suspicion that they pose a threat to national security.

(12) All agencies shall execute this directive in a lawful and appropriate manner, respecting the information privacy and other legal rights of individuals under United States law, maintaining data integrity and security, and protecting intelligence sources, methods, activities, and sensitive law enforcement information.

Policy Coordination

(13) The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, shall be responsible for interagency policy coordination on all aspects of this directive.

Roles and Responsibilities

(14) Agencies shall undertake the roles and responsibilities herein to the fullest extent permitted by law, consistent with the policy of this directive, including appropriate safeguards for information privacy and other legal rights, and in consultation with State, local, and tribal authorities, where appropriate.

(15) The Attorney General shall:

(a) Provide legal policy guidance, in coordination with the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), regarding the lawful collection, use, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information to enhance national security; and

(b) In coordination with the DNI, ensure that policies and procedures for the consolidated terrorist watchlist maximize the use of all biometric identifiers.

(16) Each of the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the DNI, and the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall:

(a) Develop and implement mutually compatible guidelines for each respective agency for the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information, to the fullest extent practicable, lawful, and necessary to protect national security;

(b) Maintain and enhance interoperability among agency biometric and associated biographic systems, by utilizing common information technology and data standards, protocols, and interfaces;

(c) Ensure compliance with laws, policies, and procedures respecting information privacy, other legal rights, and information security;

(d) Establish objectives, priorities, and guidance to ensure timely and effective tasking, collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information among authorized agencies;

(e) Program for and budget sufficient resources to support the development, operation, maintenance, and upgrade of biometric capabilities consistent with this directive and with such instructions as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget may provide; and

(f) Ensure that biometric and associated biographic and contextual information on KSTs is provided to the National Counterterrorism Center and, as appropriate, to the Terrorist Screening Center.

(17) The Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the DNI, shall coordinate the sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information with foreign partners in accordance with applicable law, including international obligations undertaken by the United States.

(18) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), shall coordinate executive branch biometric science and technology policy, including biometric standards and necessary research, development, and conformance testing programs. Recommended executive branch biometric standards are contained in the Registry of United States Government

Recommended Biometric Standards and shall be updated via the NSTC Subcommittee on Biometrics and Identity Management.


(19) Within 90 days of the date of this directive, the Attorney General, in coordination with the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security, the DNI, and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, shall, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, submit for the President's approval an action plan to implement this directive. The action plan shall do the following:

(a) Recommend actions and associated timelines for enhancing the existing terrorist-oriented identification and screening processes by expanding the use of biometrics;

(b) Consistent with applicable law, (i) recommend categories of individuals in addition to KSTs who may pose a threat to national security, and (ii) set forth cost-effective actions and associated timelines for expanding the collection and use of biometrics to identify and screen for such individuals; and

(c) Identify business processes, technological capabilities, legal authorities, and research and development efforts needed to implement this directive.

(20) Within 1 year of the date of this directive, the Attorney General, in coordination with the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security, the DNI, and the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, a report on the implementation of this directive and the associated action plan, proposing any necessary additional steps for carrying out the policy of this directive. Agencies shall provide support for, and promptly respond to, requests made by the Attorney General in furtherance of this report. The Attorney General will thereafter report to the President on the implementation of this directive as the Attorney General deems necessary or when directed by the President.

General Provisions

(21) This directive:

(a) shall be implemented consistent with applicable law, including international obligations undertaken by the United States, and the authorities of agencies, or heads of such agencies, vested by law;

(b) shall not be construed to alter, amend, or revoke any other NSPD or HSPD in effect on the effective date of this directive;

(c) is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable by law or in equity by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.


NSA Security Officer: We Should Just Kill These People

August 19, 2008 at 10:36:15

NSA Security Officer: We Should Just Kill These People

by Richard Volaar

When somebody within your own government calls you out, do you show up? How do you handle it?

Wayne Madsen, always spoiling for a fight with Bush and Cheney, or the chance to show off his undies to minimum wage airport TSA workers, has an executive level NSA staff person on record saying that significant sentiment exists within the NSA to kill troublesome bloggers and journalists.

The NSA executive staffer was, apparently, not the source of the sentiment, but this individual did pass along the context and the precise wording of the "junior G-man" working in the NSA. Prominent names listed in the NSA database of troublemakers?

1. Bill Gertz
2. James Bamford
3. Vernon Loeb
4. Jim Risen
5. Dr. John C. K. Daly
6. Wayne Madsen
7. Seymour Hersh

These were all the names Madsen published, but there are, of course, many others. Possibly you, gentle reader.

If not now, probably later.

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Support Your Local Rape Gang

By William N. Grigg at PRO LIBERTATE, One of the best liberty bloggers on the net!

Did these guys really tease an 18-year-old boy about his looks? Confessed jail rape facilitator Clinton Shawn Sydnor (left), and his accused co-conspirators Wesley Lanham (middle) and Shawn Freeman (right).

If you can stand to, take a careful look at the faces at the top of this page.

Do they inspire respect, confidence, a quiet sense of gratitude for public service courageously rendered? Or do they look like the kind of human detritus one would find lurking in the vicinity of the local Junior High, leering at underage girls (or boys)?

How would your answer change if, instead of being seen in a police mug shot, each of the individuals above were swaddled in a government-issued police costume and clothed in the supposed majesty of the "law"?

You see, these three guys, who are accused of conspiring in the jailhouse rape of an 18-year-old high school student, are former deputies in the employ of the Grant County, Kentucky Sheriff's Department. Sgt. Clinton Shawn Sydnor, the fetching item on the left, was the highest-ranking officer on duty that night at the Grant County Detention Center, located in tiny Williamstown, Kentucky.

Sydnor has entered a guilty plea and agreed to testify against the other two, Wesley Lanham and Shawn Freeman, in consideration of a reduced sentence, most likely 15 years in prison. The others, who insist that they're being used as scapegoats, confront the prospect of life sentences.

According to the indictment, these three decided to have a little fun with a terrified teenager who was arrested and jailed on Valentine's Day 2003 for driving 35 mph over the speed limit and attempting to elude the police.

These heroes in the cause of public order -- each of whom apparently considers himself the beau ideal of masculinity -- taunted the kid about his physical appearance: He reportedly weighed about 120 lbs., had blond highlights in his hair, and wore satin underwear.

Living down to every cinematic stereotype of the dim-witted, in-bred rural prison guard (stereotypes have to come from somewhere, I suppose), the deputies told the young boy he'd make a good "girlfriend" for some of the other inmates.

Clothing their sadism in an imbecile's notion of pedagogy, the deputies decided to teach a "lesson" to the boy -- who was, remember, in police custody because of a minor traffic infraction: They invited a group of convicted felons to run a train on the terrified kid. Rather than placing him in the "drunk tank," as standard procedure would require, they threw him into a remote holding area with 14 feral convicts, locking the door behind him amid predatory taunts: "Come in here, girlfriend" -- "Bring him to me!" -- "Happy Valentine's Day!"

The victim was seized by the other inmates, stripped, taken to a shower, and raped until he passed out. When he regained consciousness, he began to scream for help -- only to be grabbed again and forced to perform oral sex on the other prisoners.

It's impossible to believe that specimens like those pictured above -- certified members of the Epsilon Semi-Moron caste, Huxley's taxonomy -- could have locked up the kid with a pack of recidivist felons without knowing exactly what would happen to the victim. They knew he would be sexually violated, physically traumatized, emotionally shattered. That's the result they were seeking, because the "lesson" they wanted to teach to this helpless kid was this: You are the State's bitch.

Granted, to the extent that the cerebral activity called "thought" took place within the craniums of these tax-subsidized perverts, they almost certainly didn't think of their actions in such expansive terms. Instead, they most likely acted on an atavistic tribal impulse to get this uppity kid to show some "respect for the uniform." But this is merely a particularized application of the general tendency on the part of those who exercise State-authorized coercion.

It wasn't just the three cretins pictured above who conspired in this hideous crime. Other deputies were on duty, and at least some of them played a hands-on role. All of them must have known what was going on, and since nobody tried to stop it, everyone on that shift must be considered an accomplice.

And this brings us to a point that has to be driven home with the pitiless force of a jackhammer: It is the guilty, collusive silence of good police officers that makes possible the ever-accumulating atrocities of the "bad" ones.

Had one conscientious deputy exclaimed, "You can't do that!" as the others prepared to feed the teenager to a rape gang, it most likely wouldn't have happened.

At least one deputy, a female guard, suffered a fit of conscience so severe that it caused her to have a seizure. She asked Freeman to drive her home, a fact from which he is trying to wring an alibi. That effort isn't likely to succeed, since the female guard has pointed out that the seizure was a reaction to her knowledge of what was happening to the boy -- a fact of which Freeman was likewise aware. She was also reacting to a threat I'll describe anon.

While the victim was being raped, those who facilitated that crime did what police in such circumstances always do. They lied, devising a cover story -- namely, that a plugged floor drain in the "drunk tank" made it necessary to confine the teenager with a pack of felons. They also falsified shift logs by reporting frequent visits to check on the welfare of the victim, when not a single such visit took place.

And Sgt. Sydnor, the ringleader of this criminal conspiracy, intimidated one would-be whistleblower -- the above-mentioned female guard -- by threatening her with harm unless she lied to support the cover story. Although the perpetrators disagree about allocating the blame, the facts are undisputed. The boy and his family sued the County and won a $1.4 million settlement. Three of the inmates involved in the attack have been prosecuted and convicted of the crime.

But this matter is being tried in federal court as a "civil rights" matter, rather than locally, as it should, because a state grand jury refused to indict any of the guards who were on duty the night of the gang-rape. I suspect, but cannot presently demonstrate, that this outcome reflects an absence of zeal on the part of the prosecutor, which is generally how things turn out in cases of this kind.

This was not the only case of deputy-abetted jail rape reported at the Grant County Detention Center (GCDC).

Just a few months prior to the Valentine's Day episode, deputies arranged for an inmate with a mental disability to experience prison rape: They locked him up with a federal prisoner serving a life sentence and claimed, falsely, that the mentally handicapped inmate had sexually molested a child. This could have led to homicide, given that child molesters are regularly beaten and killed behind bars. In this case, the victim was "only" raped and forced to perform oral sex on another prisoner.

Yes, it does look like a Government School: The Grant County Detention Center.

The tax-fattened sadists at that brand-new facility (it opened in 2000, and received a 50-bed upgrade last year) routinely used criminal violence to "teach a lesson" to a prisoner.

Monday, August 11, 2008

Deputy tasers high school student against direct orders

02/19/2008 @ 10:18 am
Filed by David Edwards and Adam Doster

Outside a Maryland high school gym last Wednesday, sophomore Brandon Bennett got into a small altercation with a fellow student. It was after a basketball game and tempers were high, but the the two were separated by officials and students without much problem. Only then did things get really violent.

According to Julius Bennett, the student's father, Deputy Anthony Lenzi fired a Taser at his son after being told twice by a senior officer it was not necessary.

"He left two puncture wounds just above his heart in his chest," says Bennett. "And [Brandon] said to me that he was in quite a bit of pain because he could feel electric shocks going throughout his whole body."

The father says he has written proof Sgt. Mathew Kempel twice ordered Lenzi to holster the weapon, but Lenzi fired anyway, hitting the teen in the chest.

"Brandon did absolutely nothing wrong," says Bennett, "and there was no reason to use that type of force on my son."

The Queen Anne's County Sheriff's Office says Lenzi has been reassigned to internal duties while authorities investigate the allegations. Bennett is hoping fair punishment is given.

"I will not be satisfied until I know that Deputy Lenzi will be in a position to never to this to anyone else's child ever again."
This video is from, broadcast February 19, 2008.

The Death if Timothy Souders

Scott Pelley On The Plight Of The Mentally Ill Behind Bars
July 22, 2007

You wouldn't imagine these days that a mental patient could be chained to a concrete slab by prison guards until he died of thirst, but that’s how Timothy Souders died and he is not alone.

Souders suffered from manic depression. And like a lot of mental patients in this country, he got into trouble and ended up not in a hospital, but in jail. It was a shoplifting case and he paid with his life.

As correspondent Scott Pelley reports, no one would have been the wiser, but a medical investigator working for a federal judge caught wind of Souders' death and discovered his torturous end was recorded on videotape. The tapes, which are hard to watch, open a horrifying window on mental illness behind bars.

Clip showing the death of Timothy Souder and commentary

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Quit Resisting!

Don't Kill Me!
I can't breathe

Thursday, August 7, 2008

God save the mentally ill from the sick cops-Another taser/abuse death

I'm guessing that this man was having mental, emotional or some sort of altered state. The mentally ill are getting he worst of this. No compassion allowed.
Another big reason I cannot work with these bullys.

entire article here;

[. . . ]Another woman recounted to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette what she saw after four officers forced Thomas to the ground. "'They killed that man. They killed him. They killed him,' she added, her hands trembling. The woman said she saw one officer stomp on Mr. Thomas's upper back, holding his foot there while the subject lay on the sidewalk with his head hanging over the curb. Another officer 'reared back and punched him in the head with all his might,' she said."

Thomas vomited, then lay motionless. An ambulance arrived and he was was treated at the scene by emergency medical personnel. Police allege Thomas was conscious at the time, but he was pronounced dead after being taken to a local hospital.

Teach her to march without a permit!

Although he says Svoboda’s injury was “unfortunate,” Richard Fossa, chief of staff to North Providence Mayor Charles Lombardi, says, “The police officers weren’t found to be doing anything they don’t usually do,” and he confirms, “No one was reprimanded in any way.”

A series of 42 pictures of the march here;

All photography is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 License.
photographer Jonathan McIntosh

"It's a good, nonlethal weapon for somebody who is out of control"

{CNN) -- Heidi Gill admits she had been drinking at a bar in Warren, Ohio, and gotten into a "disagreement" with a bartender earlier this month. But she said she didn't deserve to have a police officer use a Taser gun on her multiple times.

Warren, Ohio, officer Rich Kovach is on paid administrative leave pending an investigation.

1 of 2 Video footage from the police cruiser shows Gill, 38, crawling on the ground while the officer stands over her with the stun gun. She's screaming wildly. At one point, officer Rich Kovach shoves her with his foot as she struggles.

"I've never been electrocuted," she told CNN's "American Morning" on Wednesday. "I didn't know what this was. And I really didn't think this pain was ever going to stop. It was nonstop."

She said she was trying anything to get away "so I could live."

What's with Maryland these days-Raid Mayor and kill his dogs

What is the problem in Maryland? First we find out about the untoward state police surveillance of pacifists and now this.

Pr. George's Officers Lacked 'No-Knock' Warrant in Raid
Authorities, Who Broke Down Door During Search for Drugs at Home of Berwyn Heights Mayor, Had Said They Obtained Document

By Rosalind S. Helderman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 6, 2008; B01

Prince George's County authorities did not have a "no-knock" warrant when they burst into the home of a mayor July 29, shooting and killing his two dogs -- contrary to what police said after the incident.

Judges in Maryland can grant police the right to enter a building and serve a search warrant without knocking if the judge finds there is reasonable suspicion to think evidence might be destroyed or the officers' safety might be endangered in announcing themselves.

A Prince George's police spokesman said last week that a Sheriff's Office SWAT team and county police narcotics officers were operating under such a warrant when they broke down the door of Berwyn Heights Mayor Cheye Calvo, shooting and killing his black Labrador retrievers.

But a review of the warrant indicates that police neither sought nor received permission from Circuit Court Judge Albert W. Northrup to enter without knocking. Northrup found probable cause to suspect that drugs might be in the house and granted police a standard search warrant.

"There's nothing in the four corners of the warrant saying anything about the Calvos being a threat to law enforcement," said Calvo's attorney, Timothy Maloney. "This was a lawless act by law enforcement."

Police spokesman Henry Tippett said yesterday that the statement about the warrant that public affairs officers released Friday was based on information provided by Maj. Mark Magaw, commander of the narcotics enforcement division. A request to interview Magaw was not immediately granted yesterday, and Tippett said he could not explain the discrepancy.

"That was the information that was given to us," he said.

Calvo's home was raided after he brought a package addressed to his wife inside from his front porch. Police had been tracking the package since a dog sniffed the presence of drugs in Arizona. It was delivered to the house by police posing as deliverymen and left on the porch on the instruction of Calvo's mother-in-law.

After the raid, police found the unopened package, containing 32 pounds of marijuana, in the house. According to law enforcement sources, police are investigating whether a deliveryman might have been the intended recipient of the package instead of Calvo or his wife. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is open.

Calvo has said that sheriff's deputies entered without knocking and began shooting immediately, killing 7-year-old Payton first, then shooting 4-year-old Chase as he ran to another room.

Sheriff Michael Jackson (D) has not returned several messages about the case. Sgt. Mario Ellis, a Sheriff's Office spokesman, said last Wednesday that deputies regretted shooting the dogs but that they had felt threatened by them. He has not returned calls since.

The case has highlighted friction between law enforcement agencies. The county police and Sheriff's Office have jurisdiction throughout Prince George's and typically handle major crimes, but they share jurisdiction with smaller police forces in some of the county's 27 towns and cities.

Berwyn Heights Police Chief Patrick Murphy has been highly critical of the county police for not alerting his eight-member department before the raid. He said his officers could have gained entry to the home without incident or informed county police that Calvo was unlikely to be violent.

Greenbelt Police Chief James R. Craze said yesterday that county officers contacted his 54-member department the day of the raid to ask whether his emergency response unit could serve the warrant. County police have said the Sheriff's Office was asked to participate because its team was busy at the time. Craze said it is not unusual for agencies to cooperate in such cases.

"From what I know, their SWAT team wasn't available, and that's why they were out shopping," he said.

He said his department, which conducts a drug raid a month, declined to take part because it is authorized to operate outside city limits only when the raid is conducted by a regional task force led by the Maryland State Police. County police are not part of the task force, Craze said.

Craze said county police do not always alert his officers when operating in Greenbelt. "Obviously, I would prefer that they do," he said.

The warrant issue will probably only heighten anger in the community over the incident. Even when a search warrant has been issued, courts have held that police must generally knock to announce their presence, preserve the privacy of a homeowner and let occupants know they are not experiencing an illegal home invasion.

"It's a traditional constitutional protection, going back forever," said defense attorney Richard A. Finci, who is not involved with the Calvo case.

Police officers are sometimes allowed to search without knocking, even without getting authority in advance, but courts have ruled they can do so only if there are specific circumstances at the time of the search that lead officers to conclude evidence might be destroyed or law enforcement could be endangered, said lawyer William C. Brennan, who is not involved with the case.

Were Calvo or his wife, Trinity Tomsic, to be charged in the case, the issue of the search could come up if prosecutors tried to introduce the box of marijuana as evidence. More likely, experts said, the issue could form the basis of a civil rights lawsuit filed by the family against the county in the incident.

Another issue that could arise in court is whether officers provided Calvo a copy of the warrant at the time of the raid, as required by law. Maloney said they did not, even though a detective signed a sworn statement to the judge indicating that he had. Instead, the detective brought the warrant to Calvo several days later, Maloney said.

Maloney said that Calvo and Tomsic are waiting for an explanation from law enforcement and that it would be premature discuss legal action

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Kill Navy Seals disguised as Iranian-Cheney considers..

HERSH: There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build — we in our shipyard — build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up.

Yeah, What Dr. Ben Marble said. Ditto that.

Taser Death- Teen Tased for 37 seconds Dies

I have no background on this incident but looking at the video reveals no threatening motions by the 17 year old that would justify delivering a solid 37 second jolt to his sternal area.

What was he electrocuted for? Being a smart ass?

Friday, August 1, 2008

No Real Threat: The Pentagon's Secret Database on Peaceful Protest (1/17/2007)

In December 2005, major media outlets began reporting that a highly secretive component of the Department of Defense was accumulating and maintaining information on peaceful groups within the United States. The reports were a disturbing echo of an earlier era of unchecked and illegal government surveillance — an era when the FBI
under J. Edgar Hoover infiltrated civil rights and peace groups, and the United States military maintained secret files on tens of thousands of American citizens.

The disclosures cried out for congressional oversight and investigation. Yet Congress was silent. In an attempt to learn more about the extent of the Pentagon's surveillance activities and the policies that had authorized them, the American Civil Liberties Union and several of its state affiliates filed Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf
of dozens of groups that had protested against the Administration's foreign policy. What we have learned is troubling. What we still don't know may be even more disturbing. It is time for Congress to act, and to ensure that Americans may once again exercise their First Amendment rights without fear that they will be tracked in a government database of suspicious activities.



Cellphone Tracking Powers on Request

I am researching the myriad of ways that we can be tracked and any evidence of law enforcement or government use of these methods in violation of the US Constitution/Bill of Rights.

Any evidence of such activities must be met with outrage and action by Americans or we will bear, in part, responsible for the rapid downhill slide of our country into the common abyss of Fascism.

Lex Sentry

Cellphone Tracking Powers on Request
Secret Warrants Granted Without Probable Cause

By Ellen Nakashima
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 23, 2007; A01

Federal officials are routinely asking courts to order cellphone companies to furnish real-time tracking data so they can pinpoint the whereabouts of drug traffickers, fugitives and other criminal suspects, according to judges and industry lawyers.

In some cases, judges have granted the requests without requiring the government to demonstrate that there is probable cause to believe that a crime is taking place or that the inquiry will yield evidence of a crime. Privacy advocates fear such a practice may expose average Americans to a new level of government scrutiny of their daily lives.

Such requests run counter to the Justice Department's internal recommendation that federal prosecutors seek warrants based on probable cause to obtain precise location data in private areas. The requests and orders are sealed at the government's request, so it is difficult to know how often the orders are issued or denied.

The issue is taking on greater relevance as wireless carriers are racing to offer sleek services that allow cellphone users to know with the touch of a button where their friends or families are. The companies are hoping to recoup investments they have made to meet a federal mandate to provide enhanced 911 (E911) location tracking. Sprint Nextel, for instance, boasts that its "loopt" service even sends an alert when a friend is near, "putting an end to missed connections in the mall, at the movies or around town."

With Verizon's Chaperone service, parents can set up a "geofence" around, say, a few city blocks and receive an automatic text message if their child, holding the cellphone, travels outside that area.

"Most people don't realize it, but they're carrying a tracking device in their pocket," said Kevin Bankston of the privacy advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Cellphones can reveal very precise information about your location, and yet legal protections are very much up in the air."

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Spies for Hire by Tim Shorrock

This book is next on my list.

In Spies for Hire, investigative reporter Tim Shorrock lifts the veil off a major story the government doesn't want us to know about -- the massive outsourcing of top secret intelligence activities to private-sector contractors.

Running spy networks overseas. Tracking down terrorists in the Middle East. Interrogating enemy prisoners. Analyzing data from spy satellites and intercepted phone calls. All of these are vital intelligence tasks that traditionally have been performed by government officials accountable to Congress and the American people. But that is no longer the case.

Starting during the Clinton administration, when intelligence budgets were cut drastically and privatization of government services became national policy, and expanding dramatically in the wake of 9/11, when the CIA and other agencies were frantically looking to hire analysts and linguists, the Intelligence Community has been relying more and more on corporations to perform sensitive tasks heretofore considered to be exclusively the work of federal employees. This outsourcing of intelligence activities is now a $50 billion-a-year business that consumes up to 70 percent of the U.S. intelligence budget. And it's a business that the government has tried hard to keep under wraps.

Drawing on interviews with key players in the Intelligence-Industrial Complex, contractors' annual reports and public filings with the government, and on-the-spot reporting from intelligence industry conferences and investor briefings, Spies for Hire provides the first behind-the-scenes look at this new way of spying. Shorrock shows how corporations such as Booz Allen Hamilton, Lockheed Martin, SAIC, CACI International, and IBM have become full partners with the CIA, the National Security Agency, and the Pentagon in their most sensitive foreign and domestic operations. He explores how this partnership has led to wasteful spending and threatens to erode the privacy protections and congressional oversight so important to American democracy.

Shorrock exposes the kinds of spy work the private sector is doing, such as interrogating prisoners in Iraq, managing covert operations, and collaborating with the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans' overseas phone calls and e-mails. And he casts light on a "shadow Intelligence Community" made up of former top intelligence officials who are now employed by companies that do this spy work, such as former CIA directors George Tenet and James Woolsey. Shorrock also traces the rise of Michael McConnell from his days as head of the NSA to being a top executive at Booz Allen Hamilton to returning to government as the nation's chief spymaster.

From CIA covert actions to NSA eavesdropping, from Abu Ghraib to Guantánamo, from the Pentagon's techno-driven war in Iraq to the coming global battles over information dominance and control of cyberspace, contractors are doing it all. Spies for Hire goes behind today's headlines to highlight how private corporations are aiding the growth of a new and frightening national surveillance state

articles written by Tim Shorrock;

Parents question why Ozark police used stun gun on injured son

How can they justify tasing a boy with a broken back 19 friggin times?!
Must be one of those things only a cop can understand.

by Sara Sheffield, KY3 News

OZARK, Mo. -- A family from Branson wants answers about what happened to their son that left him hospitalized. Early Saturday morning, police found Mace Hutchinson, 16, underneath the Highway F overpass over U.S. 65.
Mace ended up in intensive care at a hospital. His parents believe the actions of Ozark police officers contributed to his injuries and slowed doctors’ abilities to speed his recovery.

“We called the police. My wife was afraid he was going to get ran over or hit,” said witness Doug Messersmith.

Messersmith and his wife were the last known people to see 16-year-old boy walking, shortly before their phone call to 911.

“He looked a little agitated but, other than that, he didn't look to be falling down drunk or anything like that,” he said.

By the time officers arrived, the teen was off the 30-foot overpass, lying on the shoulder below along U.S. 65, with no good explanation as to how he got there.

“According to the doctors, all injuries are consistent with a fall,” said his aunt, Samantha.

Mace's dad believes it was just that, a fall, not a jump. The question is why.

“They tested his system. He was clean of drugs and alcohol. We don't know why unless just being in shock and the whole thing in itself caused him to forget everything,” said Hutchinson.

His aunt says he is undergoing major surgery for a broken back and broken heel. While he was lying on the ground, she wonders why Ozark police used an electric stun gun on him up to 19 times.

“I'm not an officer, but i don't see the reason for ‘Tasering’ somebody laying there with a broken back. I don't consider that a threat,”

His dad says the use of the stun gun delayed what would have been immediate surgery by two days.

“The ‘Tasering’ increased his white blood cell count and caused him to have a temperature so they could not go into the operation.”

“He refused to comply with the officers and so the officers had to deploy their Tasers in order to subdue him. He is making incoherent statements; he's also making statements such as, ‘Shoot cops, kill cops,’ things like that. So there was cause for concern to the officers,” said Ozark Police Capt. Thomas Rousset.

Police say although there are several unanswered questions; the reason for the use of a stun gun is not one of them.

“It's a big concern for the officers to keep this guy out of traffic, to keep him from getting hurt,” said Rousset.

Mace was still in intensive care on Wednesday night, listed in fair condition. He was scheduled for surgery again on Thursday. The family, along with the Ozark Police Department, hopes someone will see this report and come forward with some information. You can call (417) 699-4789 with information or call the Ozark Police Department.

Centers Tap Into Personal Databases

State Groups Were Formed After 9/11

By Robert O'Harrow Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 2, 2008; A01

Intelligence centers run by states across the country have access to personal information about millions of Americans, including unlisted cellphone numbers, insurance claims, driver's license photographs and credit reports, according to a document obtained by The Washington Post.

One center also has access to top-secret data systems at the CIA, the document shows, though it's not clear what information those systems contain.

Dozens of the organizations known as fusion centers were created after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to identify potential threats and improve the way information is shared. The centers use law enforcement analysts and sophisticated computer systems to compile, or fuse, disparate tips and clues and pass along the refined information to other agencies. They are expected to play important roles in national information-sharing networks that link local, state and federal authorities and enable them to automatically sift their storehouses of records for patterns and clues.

Though officials have publicly discussed the fusion centers' importance to national security, they have generally declined to elaborate on the centers' activities. But a document that lists resources used by the fusion centers shows how a dozen of the organizations in the northeastern United States rely far more on access to commercial and government databases than had previously been disclosed.

Those details have come to light at a time of debate about domestic intelligence efforts, including eavesdropping and data-aggregation programs at the National Security Agency, and whether the government has enough protections in place to prevent abuses.

The list of information resources was part of a survey conducted last year, officials familiar with the effort said. It shows that, like most police agencies, the fusion centers have subscriptions to private information-broker services that keep records about Americans' locations, financial holdings, associates, relatives, firearms licenses and the like.

Centers serving New York and other states also tap into a Federal Trade Commission database with information about hundreds of thousands of identity-theft reports, the document and police interviews show.

Pennsylvania buys credit reports and uses face-recognition software to examine driver's license photos, while analysts in Rhode Island have access to car-rental databases. In Maryland, authorities rely on a little-known data broker called Entersect, which claims it maintains 12 billion records about 98 percent of Americans.

In its online promotional material, Entersect calls itself "the silent partner to municipal, county, state, and federal justice agencies who access our databases every day to locate subjects, develop background information, secure information from a cellular or unlisted number, and much more."

Police officials said fusion center analysts are trained to use the information responsibly, legally and only on authorized criminal and counterterrorism cases. They stressed the importance of secret and public data in rooting out obscure threats. [. . . ]

Monday, July 28, 2008

I'll bet he is so proud.

On January 21, 2005, Officer Carlos Artson saved himself and his fellow officer from being shot. Officer Artson was confronted by a woman pointing a loaded handgun at him, during the service of a high risk, ‘no knock’ search warrant for an ongoing narcotics investigation."

Cheryl Lynn Noel
• Cheryl Lynn Noel, a church-going mother: Shot and killed after grabbing her legal handgun when masked intruders—a SWAT team—stormed into her bedroom in Baltimore. The justification for the assault? Police investigators had found marijuana seeds in the family’s trash bin.

William N. Grigg writes;
In January 2005, Baltimore resident Cheryl Lynn Noel, whose son had been assaulted by gang-bangers on the way home from school and whose step-daughter had been murdered several years earlier, was startled awake by an armed assault on her home. Lying in bed with her husband Charles, Cheryl – who ran Bible studies in her home – reached for her legal, registered handgun. When armed intruders violated the sanctity of her bedroom, Cheryl was armed, but according to Charles, she didn't point the gun directly at the intruders.

The marauders were, of course, SWAT operators representing Baltimore's “finest.”
Tactical Officer Carlos Artson – protected with a helmet, mask, ballistic shield, and bullet-resistant body armor – shot Cheryl twice. She was clad in a nightgown.

Cheryl's grasp on her handgun slackened – not surprisingly, since she was probably dead already. Artson continued his approach, yelling at Cheryl to move further away from the gun; not surprisingly, his victim couldn't comply. So this paladin of the public weal capped her a third time, administering the coup de grace from point-blank range.

The “justification” for this 4:30 a.m. Paramiltary raid was this: Someone found marijuana seeds in the family trash.

Which means that someone was looking for a pretext to conduct a raid of the type that has become alarmingly common in the American Reich.

On October 2, Officer Carlos Artson, who murdered Cheryl Lynn Noel, was awarded the Silver Star, the department's second-highest award for valor. The citation claims that Artson “saved himself and his fellow officers from being shot” after being “confronted by a woman pointing a loaded handgun at him, during the service of a high risk, `no knock' search warrant for an ongoing narcotics investigation.”

Artson was “confronted” by Mrs. Noel in exactly the same sense that any other armed robber could make that claim. Of course, armed robbers don't give each other puerile little baubles to celebrate their “valor.”

When the State's agents can violate our homes at will, gun down women without consequence, and -- pay attention, please! -- give each other combat citations after such engagements, only one rational interpretation is possible: The Regime is literally at war with the American people.

Saturday, July 26, 2008

The Cryptogon

“Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

-Winston Churchill

These are the words of Winston Churchill aptly applied to the current situation we face as freedom-loving Americans. I was reminded of it by the Kevin, an American ex-pat (or refugee)living in New Zealand. He is the author of a blog called The Cryptogon. He has a perspective that is worth pondering. Peruse The Cryptogon here;

Lex Sentry

YES! Bush can Detain US Civilains Indefinitely

It seems like there is no final answer to questions of authority claimed by the Bush led Executive. They will just keep going to court until they get the answer they want. So there you have it. I suppode if you have unlimited stolen wealth and rally don't care about the law anyways-why not? These cases are just busy blocks to keep the courts occupied.

This reminds me of how Pharma just runs many trials (of a drug) keeps the ones that look good and discards the one that do not suit its porposes.

Lex Sentry

Working hard to earn my spot on the government's Red List.
July 16th, 2008

Via: New York Times:

President Bush has the legal power to order the indefinite military detentions of civilians captured in the United States, the federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., ruled on Tuesday in a fractured 5-to-4 decision.

But a second, overlapping 5-to-4 majority of the court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, ruled that Ali al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar now in military custody in Charleston, S.C., must be given an additional opportunity to challenge his detention in federal court there. An earlier court proceeding, in which the government had presented only a sworn statement from a defense intelligence official, was inadequate, the second majority ruled.

The decision was a victory for the Bush administration, which had maintained that a 2001 Congressional authorization to use military force after the Sept. 11 attacks granted the president the power to detain people living in the United States.

The court effectively reversed a divided three-judge panel of its own members, which ruled last year that the government lacked the power to detain civilians legally in the United States as enemy combatants. That panel ordered the government either to charge Mr. Marri or to release him. The case is likely to reach the Supreme Court.

Research Credit: ltcolonelnemo

In depth-Alternet;

Friday, July 25, 2008

DNA evidence-The Truth

Forget about CSI and all of those other shows that make DNA evidence appear to be practically infaliable. The potential for human error, misrepresentaion of statistics, falsifying eveidence as well as the actual reliability of DNA evidence can send an innocent person to death row. As amazing of a breakthrough as genetic technology is the limitations it bears must be understood. There is a strong and steady movement to find increasing opportunities to collect our DNA.

Here are some important facts;

First-a PubMed abstract.

Errors in sample handling or test interpretation may cause false positives in forensic DNA testing. This article uses a Bayesian model to show how the potential for a false positive affects the evidentiary value of DNA evidence and the sufficiency of DNA evidence to meet traditional legal standards for conviction. The Bayesian analysis is contrasted with the "false positive fallacy," an intuitively appealing but erroneous alternative interpretation. The findings show the importance of having accurate information about both the random match probability and the false positive probability when evaluating DNA evidence. It is argued that ignoring or underestimating the potential for a false positive can lead to serious errors of interpretation, particularly when the suspect is identified through a "DNA dragnet" or database search, and that ignorance of the true rate of error creates an important element of uncertainty about the value of DNA evidence.

PMID: 12570198 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

For more than three decades, Sylvester's slaying went unsolved. Then, in 2004, a search of California's DNA database of criminal offenders yielded an apparent breakthrough: Badly deteriorated DNA from the assailant's sperm was linked to John Puckett, an obese, wheelchair-bound 70-year-old with a history of rape.

The DNA "match" was based on fewer than half of the genetic markers typically used to connect someone to a crime, and there was no other physical evidence.

Puckett insisted he was innocent, saying that although DNA at the crime scene happened to match his, it belonged to someone else.

At Puckett's trial earlier this year, the prosecutor told the jury that the chance of such a coincidence was 1 in 1.1 million.

Jurors were not told, however, the statistic that leading scientists consider the most significant: the probability that the database search had hit upon an innocent person.

In Puckett's case, it was 1 in 3.

The case is emblematic of a national problem, The Times has found.

Prosecutors and crime labs across the country routinely use numbers that exaggerate the significance of DNA matches in "cold hit" cases, in which a suspect is identified through a database search.

Jurors are often told that the odds of a coincidental match are hundreds of thousands of times more remote than they actually are, according to a review of scientific literature and interviews with leading authorities in the field.

Two national scientific committees, including the FBI's DNA advisory board, have recommended portraying the odds more conservatively. But interviews with expert witnesses and DNA analysts from crime labs across the country show that few if any have adopted that approach.

The FBI lab, which oversees the nation's offender databases, has disregarded the recommendation of its own advisory board, bureau officials acknowledged. So far, the courts have ruled in law enforcement's favor on this issue.

As a result, some experts fear, a technology best known for freeing the innocent could be causing its own miscarriages of justice.

"It is only a matter of time until someone is wrongfully convicted because of this," said Keith Devlin, a Stanford mathematician who has studied the problem.

DNA profiles are widely perceived as a unique genetic fingerprint. In fact, they are slivers of the human genome -- up to 13 markers that contain about a millionth of the information on all the chromosomes. Relatives often share many markers, and even unrelated people on average share two or three.

So DNA "matches" by themselves can never definitively link someone to a crime.

The best science can do is to estimate the likelihood that a match has occurred by sheer chance. These statistics are easily distorted or misunderstood by lawyers, judges, juries and even expert witnesses.

Judge frees Oklahoma man facing execution

Police misconduct tainted the case against a convict who did 22 years.
By Henry Weinstein, Times Staff Writer

May 12, 2007

A judge in Oklahoma City on Friday dismissed murder charges against a man who was sentenced to death three times in the 1982 slaying of a teenager, convictions that were based largely on testimony from a police department chemist who was fired for fraud and misconduct in 2001.

Curtis McCarty

Oklahoma District Court Judge Twyla Mason Gray ruled that the case against Curtis E. McCarty was tainted by the actions of former Oklahoma City police chemist Joyce Gilchrist, whose work has been called into question in a host of other death penalty cases.

Citing the 1988 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Arizona vs. Youngblood, Gray said she was dismissing the charges because Gilchrist had acted in "bad faith," and "most likely did destroy or intentionally lose" hair that was crucial evidence in McCarty's trial in the 1982 stabbing and strangling of Pamela Kaye Willis.

According to several people at Friday's hearing, Gray said she still thought that McCarty may have been involved in the murder but that the law required her to throw the case out.

Innocence Project attorney Colin Starger, who has represented McCarty since 2003, said, "Every piece of evidence in this case, including evidence [that] was used improperly to secure convictions, now shows Curtis McCarty's innocence."

Free after nearly 22 years behind bars, McCarty said Friday that he had been out for "only a few hours" and had not "had time to digest" everything that occurred: "I am happy not just for myself but for my family and all the people who worked so hard" for his release.

"But for the Innocence Project, Judge Gray would not have done what she did today. I don't think she had cause to take a dig at me, but I join her in her condemnation of Gilchrist," McCarty said in an interview.

McCarty was first convicted of the murder and sentenced to death in 1986. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the verdicts, saying that Dist. Atty. Robert H. Macy Sr. had acted deplorably during the trial, and that Gilchrist had omitted key information from her forensic reports.

McCarty was convicted and sentenced to death again in 1989. That conviction was upheld on appeal but the death sentence was reversed. A new penalty phase trial was conducted in 1996, and McCarty was sentenced to death a third time.

Five years later, serious questions surfaced about Gilchrist's conduct in many cases, including that of Jeffrey T. Pierce. In May 2001, Pierce was freed from an Oklahoma prison after serving 15 years for a rape that DNA tests ultimately showed he did not commit.

A federal appeals court overturned the death sentence of a man convicted of rape and murder in August 2001, concluding that jurors might have relied on Gilchrist's testimony.

Gilchrist was fired in September 2001 for allegedly performing shoddy work and giving false or misleading testimony, including 23 cases in which she helped send men to death row. Eleven of those defendants have been executed, according to the Innocence Project.

State and federal investigations of Gilchrist's work in more than 1,100 cases unearthed more problems, including her performance in McCarty's case.

Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, said McCarty's was "one of the worst examples of law enforcement misconduct" in his experience.
Robert H. Macy, who was the Oklahoma County District Attorney for 21 years, prosecuted McCarty in both of his trials. Macy sent 73 people to death row – more than any other prosecutor in the nation – and 20 of them have been executed. Macy has said publicly that he believes executing an innocent person is a sacrifice worth making in order to keep the death penalty in the United States.

Macy committed misconduct in the manner that he prosecuted McCarty and presented the case to the jury. His misconduct was compounded when he relied on Joyce Gilchrist, a police lab analyst who falsified test results and hid or destroyed evidence in order to help secure McCarty’s convictions. Gilchrist was the lead forensic analyst in 23 cases that ended in death sentences (11 of the defendants in those cases have been executed).

“This is by far one of the worst cases of law enforcement misconduct in the history of the American criminal justice system,” said Barry Scheck, Co-Director of the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with Cardozo School of Law. “Bob Macy has said that executing an innocent person is a risk worth taking – and he came very close to doing just that with Curtis McCarty.”

On Friday, Oklahoma County Dist. Atty. David Prater said he thought Gray's dismissal of charges against McCarty "was the correct decision," even though he is not convinced that McCarty is innocent.

"Because of the checks and balances in the justice system, the judge has the duty to make sure a person is afforded a fair trial…. With her ruling that potentially exculpatory evidence had been destroyed by Gilchrist, Judge Gray said he could never get a fair trial," Prater said.

The Times could not reach Gilchrist on Friday.

Sunday, July 20, 2008

What Happens When a School Board of Religious Zealots Will 'Lie for Jesus'?

By Onnesha Roychoudhuri, AlterNet
Posted on June 20, 2008, Printed on July 20, 2008
The intelligent design case in Dover, Penn., was the stuff of tabloid dreams: a community divided when a school board led by religious fundamentalists tried to bring creationism into the local biology curriculum. But look beneath the surface, and it was hardly the two-dimensional "science versus religion" narrative favored by the press. As Lauri Lebo, a local reporter who covered the trial, writes, the "'Darwinism'-spouting teachers were preachers' kids; the 'atheist' plaintiffs taught Sunday school; the 'activist' judge was a Bush-appointed Republican; and the journalists labeled 'liars' were willing to go to jail for the truth."

In her new book, The Devil in Dover: An Insider's Story of Dogma v. Darwin in Small-Town America, Lebo writes of her journey through a familiar town made alien by a handful of school board members willing to, as Lebo puts it, "lie for Jesus." Lebo closely follows the story of how a handful of fundamentalists, pushing to include the teaching of creationism in school biology courses change their tack when the conservative Christian Thomas More Law Center gets involved. School board members suddenly stop talking about Jesus and creationism, denying statements they made to local reporters, and saying instead they were advocating the teaching of the so-called science of intelligent design. The lies were outright enough to make the presiding judge flush with anger, who subsequently cited the school board's "breathtaking inanity," in his decision against them.

"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects?"

James Madison, in "Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785

Saturday, July 19, 2008

State Police Spy on Law Abiding Political Acivists

Maryland State Police officers spent hundred of hours infilterating and recording peace activists and anti-death penalty protesters in 2005 and 2006 the ACLU revealed yesterday. Although there is no mention of any illegal activity by any of these people, some of their names were entered into a Law Enforcement databse along with suspected terrorists ann other dangerous criminals. (No more "Friendly Skies" for them)

Nearly 300 man hours and 14 months of time was invested in this garbage. I wonder how much the tax-payers were looted for?

The Superintendant of Maryland State Police said "does not inappropriately curtail the expression or demonstration of the civil liberties of protesters or organizations acting lawfully."


These were pacifists who held open meeting and publicsised meeting times and dates.
Why would Maryland State Police be wasting their time with this?

According to the ACLU;

The MSP's Homeland Security and Intelligence Division also appears to have been working to specially track the activities of at least one individual activist, Max Obuszewski, who was entered into the "Washington/Baltimore High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area" (HIDTA) database. That database, which is funded by the federal government, was intended to facilitate information sharing among federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies engaged in drug interdiction. In December 2006, Congress modified the federal law to allow HIDTA funds to be used to assist in terrorism investigations as well. The entry for Mr. Obuszewski indicates that the "Primary Crime" linked to him in the database is "Terrorism-Anti Govern[ment], and the "Secondary Crime" is "Terrorism – Anti-War Protestors" – which are outlandish and blatantly false accusations.

So, even though Mr.Obuszewski has broken no laws and there is no evidence that he intends to he now has his name in a federal database labeled an anti-government terrorist?! They are building themselves a mighty big list and in the process transforming lawful dissent into boiling resentments.


Friday, July 18, 2008

Gop Whistleblower Names Carl Rove in Ohio '04 Election Theft

Ohio Attorney Files Motion to Lift Stay in Ohio Case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v Blackwell
At a press conference this morning in Columbus, Ohio, Cliff Arnebeck, lead attorney for the plaintiffs in the case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell, announced that he is filing a motion to "lift the stay in the case [and] proceed with targeted discovery in order to help protect the integrity of the 2008 election."

Arnebeck will also "be providing copies of document hold notices to the U.S .Chamber Institute for Legal Reform and the U.S. Justice Department for Karl Rove emails from the White House."
This case has the potential to put some of the most powerful people in the country in jail, according to Arnebeck, as he was joined by a well-respected, life-long Republican computer security expert who charged that the red flags seen during Ohio's 2004 Presidential Election would have been cause for "a fraud investigation in a bank, but it doesn't when it comes to our vote."

"This entire system is being programmed in secret by programmers who have no oversight by anybody," the expert charged, as Arnebeck detailed allegations of complicity by a number of powerful GOP operatives and companies who had unique access both to the election results as reported in 2004, as well as to U.S. House and Senate computer networks even today.

The presser was attended by some of the corporate-controlled media, including the head of the Ohio AP bureau, the Columbus Dispatch, and IndyMedia. Listening in by phone were ABC News, our friends from RAW STORY, and me, your humble blogger. I recorded the presser, so I have no links for the quotes in this post, but I transcribed them word-for-word and can vouch for their accuracy.
One of the more delightful and interesting quotes comes from Arnebeck, concerning what he expects to discover as the stay is lifted: "[W]e anticipate Mr. Rove will be identified as having engaged in a corrupt, ongoing pattern of corrupt activities specifically affecting the situation here in Ohio."

According to Arnebeck, his expert witness, Stephen Spoonamore, "works for credit card companies chasing data thieves, identity thieves around the globe, and also consults with government agencies including the Secret Service, the Pentagon, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in criminal matters. [He's] really one of the top, and in fact the top private cop in the world on the subject of data security.

"First, some background. The King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell case was filed on August 31, 2006. At issue was "whether the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to Plaintiffs by the Civil Rights Act, and the First, Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution have been violated by the past and ongoing conduct of Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell in connection with past elections in Ohio."

A stay was previously entered into on joint motion of the parties, Ohio's Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner and the plaintiffs, to support settlement discussions in the case. "At one point," Arnebeck noted this morning, "this was interrupted when the Secretary wanted to bring all the ballots that had been ordered preserved by Judge Marbley, bring them in to one location. When the ballots came in, there was significant omissions and reports of the destruction of some of the ballots."
The BRAD BLOG reporter previously on some of some of the ballots missing from 56 of Ohio's 88 counties, despite the federal court order.

Arnebeck explained that part of the reason for the stay, at the time, was to allow the Ohio Attorney General to proceed first, as provided in Ohio House Bill 3 which states, in part:
...the attorney general may initiate criminal proceedings for election fraud under section 3599.42 of the Revised Code which results from a violation of any provision of Title XXXV of the Revised Code, other than Chapter 3517. of the Revised Code, involving voting, an initiative or referendum petition process, or the conducting of an election, by presenting evidence of criminal violations in question to the prosecuting attorney of any county in which the violations may be prosecuted. If the prosecuting attorney does not prosecute the violations within a reasonable time or requests the attorney general to do so, the attorney general may proceed with the prosecution of the violations with all of the rights, privileges, and powers conferred by law on a prosecuting attorney, including, but not limited to, the power to appear before a grand jury and to interrogate witnesses before a grand jury.
Arnebeck said that the Attorney General's office said they were ready to begin the investigation of the 2004 presidential election in Ohio, and Arnebeck said he submitted a great deal of material to them, including "Bob's [Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman's] book on what happened in Ohio, documentation of the exit poll discrepancy, [and] John Conyers' report to the Congress which was the factual basis for the challenge to the electoral votes of the Ohio vote in January of 2005."
About a month later, the Attorney General's office contacted Arnebeck and asked him, "Who do you want to indict?"
Arnebeck explained that the AG's "concept of looking at this from a criminal standpoint was not to convene a grand jury and cast the net broadly and use the grand jury process to investigate and narrow the focus into the question of who may have tampered with those votes. But rather they wanted us to come to them with a more focused case."

. . . More from op ed news;

Electrical Risks at Bases in Iraq Worse Than Previously Said

This story has been developing for some time now. KBR is contracted by the government to provide basic services including housing and electrical for our troops in Iraq. They are making money hand over fist but are unable to keep up with the workload. KBR has resorted to subcontracting with unskilled Iraqi workers, payig them only a few dollars a day. There is ample evidence that KBR was aware of the electrical problems at Radwaniya Palace Complex, near Baghdad’s airport, where Sergeant Maseth died. On January 2, 2008, Staff Sergeant Ryan Maseth was electrocuted while taking a shower in his living quarters. The system was not properly grounded. 12 other soldiers have also been electrocuted since 2003.

Maseth's mother says she pressed the military for answers, eventually uncovering more details about her son's electrocution. The surging current left burn marks across his body, even singeing his hair. Army reports show that he probably suffered a long, painful death.
Fellow soldiers had to break down the door to help, said Patrick Cavanaugh, an attorney for Maseth's parents.
"When they kicked down the door, they smelled burning hair, and they rushed over, saw Sgt. Maseth lying there unconscious, and one of the rescuers himself was shocked electrically and sustained a fairly good jolt because the water and the pipes were still electrified," Cavanaugh said.


Who is KBR anyways. Kellog, Brown and Root. They are also a subsidiary of the infamous Halliburton.

The New York Times

July 18, 2008

WASHINGTON — Shoddy electrical work by private contractors on United States military bases in Iraq is widespread and dangerous, causing more deaths and injuries from fires and shocks than the Pentagon has acknowledged, according to internal Army documents.
During just one six-month period — August 2006 through January 2007 — at least 283 electrical fires destroyed or damaged American military facilities in Iraq, including the military’s largest dining hall in the country, documents obtained by The New York Times show. Two soldiers died in an electrical fire at their base near Tikrit in 2006, the records note, while another was injured while jumping from a burning guard tower in May 2007.
And while the Pentagon has previously reported that 13 Americans have been electrocuted in Iraq, many more have been injured, some seriously, by shocks, according to the documents. A log compiled earlier this year at one building complex in Baghdad disclosed that soldiers complained of receiving electrical shocks in their living quarters on an almost daily basis.