I'm headed right.
H/T Michael Krieger @ zerohedge.com
19 January 2012
Mitt Romney on the Confederate Flag
via Dixie Broadcasting
Translation:
"I'm a Yankee, are you nuts? What do you think I'm going to say? As a Yankee, if I say the battle flag is Heritage, or it's OK for you, I denigrate and belittle the whole worldview of Yankeedom going back 150 plus years"
Also:
"You lost, get over it."
"We are one country, whether you like it or not"
"You have no right to claim a unique heritage"
"Southerners/Southrons: You lost your right to self determination 150 years ago. Stop thinking wrong..."
Its like saying:
Basque, you are Spanish. Catalans, you are Spanish. Welsh, Irish, and Scots, you belong to England, and serve England.
You were conquered; stop thinking.
18 January 2012
17 January 2012
Treason, Sedition, and Subversive activities: Patriot bloggers, FYI
Paraphrasing Patrick Henry:
If this blog be sedition, make the most of it!
Background:
Sedition is the illegal promotion of resistance against the government, usually in speech or writing.
What is illegal depends on the government and its regard for freedom of speech. The crime of sedition is alive and actively prosecuted in many countries today.
In the United States, sedition as a crime has been enforced at several points in its history, notably during the presidency of John Adams under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, during and after World War I, and under a 1940 federal law, the Smith Act, criminalizing membership in the Communist Party.
When the U.S. Supreme Court first addressed the question of the constitutionality of sedition laws after World War I, the majority used what was then the traditional standard for judging "seditious" speech--whether it had a tendency, even a remote tendency--to stir people to resistance or rebellion against the government. Later, however, justices Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Louis Brandeis began to develop a more expansive notion that would give more breathing room to political dissent. One of the most stirring writings in American law in defense of free speech is the opinion by Justice Brandeis in Whitney v. California in 1927. Holmes' and Brandeis' theory did not prevail in their lifetimes.
In 1964, in New York Times v. Sullivan, a majority of the the U.S. Supreme Court agreed that punishment for sedition was contrary to the First Amendment, And in 1969, in the case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, the high court set forth the current standard for punishing seditious speech. Source link.
The following is current law:
US Code: Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 115, § 2383-2386
§ 2383: Rebellion or Insurrection:
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
§ 2384. Seditious Conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
§ 2385: Advocating Overthrow of Government
Good related summary article:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/04/sedition_is_constitutional.html
Bottom line: If the wind blows one way (i.e. in court), you are guilty of sedition. If it blows another way, you are exercising your right to free speech.
It is up to the .gov whether or not you are worth crushing like a bug.
If this blog be sedition, make the most of it!
Background:
Sedition is the illegal promotion of resistance against the government, usually in speech or writing.
What is illegal depends on the government and its regard for freedom of speech. The crime of sedition is alive and actively prosecuted in many countries today.
In the United States, sedition as a crime has been enforced at several points in its history, notably during the presidency of John Adams under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, during and after World War I, and under a 1940 federal law, the Smith Act, criminalizing membership in the Communist Party.
When the U.S. Supreme Court first addressed the question of the constitutionality of sedition laws after World War I, the majority used what was then the traditional standard for judging "seditious" speech--whether it had a tendency, even a remote tendency--to stir people to resistance or rebellion against the government. Later, however, justices Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Louis Brandeis began to develop a more expansive notion that would give more breathing room to political dissent. One of the most stirring writings in American law in defense of free speech is the opinion by Justice Brandeis in Whitney v. California in 1927. Holmes' and Brandeis' theory did not prevail in their lifetimes.
In 1964, in New York Times v. Sullivan, a majority of the the U.S. Supreme Court agreed that punishment for sedition was contrary to the First Amendment, And in 1969, in the case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, the high court set forth the current standard for punishing seditious speech. Source link.
The following is current law:
US Code: Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 115, § 2383-2386
§ 2383: Rebellion or Insurrection:
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
§ 2384. Seditious Conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
§ 2385: Advocating Overthrow of Government
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
§ 2386: Registration of Certain Organizations
An organization is engaged in “civilian military activity” if:
(1) it gives instruction to, or prescribes instruction for, its members in the use of firearms or other weapons or any substitute therefor, or military or naval science; or
(2) it receives from any other organization or from any individual instruction in military or naval science; or
(4) it engages, either with or without arms, in drills or parades of a military or naval character; or
(5) it engages in any other form of organized activity which in the opinion of the Attorney General constitutes preparation for military action;
An organization is “subject to foreign control” if:
(a) it solicits or accepts financial contributions, loans, or support of any kind, directly or indirectly, from, or is affiliated directly or indirectly with, a foreign government or a political subdivision thereof, or an agent, agency, or instrumentality of a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, or a political party in a foreign country, or an international political organization; or
(b) its policies, or any of them, are determined by or at the suggestion of, or in collaboration with, a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, or an agent, agency, or instrumentality of a foreign government or a political subdivision thereof, or a political party in a foreign country, or an international political organization.
Good related summary article:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/04/sedition_is_constitutional.html
Bottom line: If the wind blows one way (i.e. in court), you are guilty of sedition. If it blows another way, you are exercising your right to free speech.
It is up to the .gov whether or not you are worth crushing like a bug.
Pornoscanner for your car. Coming soon to a border crossing or a random VIPR checkpoint near you.
Think you got a right to privacy from gummint?
Think again. Not in your house. Not in the street. Not at the airport.
Not in your car:
Internal Homeland Security documents describing specifications for border-crossing scanners, which emit gamma or X-ray radiation to probe vehicles and their occupants, are raising new health and privacy concerns, CNET has learned.
Even though a public outcry has prompted Homeland Security to move away from adding X-ray machines to airports--it purchased 300 body scanners last year that used alternative technology instead--it appears to be embracing them at U.S.-Mexico land border crossings as an efficient way to detect drugs, currency, and explosives.
A 63-page set of specifications (PDF), heavily redacted, obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center through the Freedom of Information Act, says the scanners must "be based on X-Ray or gamma technology," which use potentially dangerous ionizing radiation at high energies, and "shall be capable of scanning cars, SUVs, motorcycles and buses."
Link
Oh, and dont worry bout cancer from the radiation. We're from the government. We'll take care of you.
Think again. Not in your house. Not in the street. Not at the airport.
Not in your car:
Internal Homeland Security documents describing specifications for border-crossing scanners, which emit gamma or X-ray radiation to probe vehicles and their occupants, are raising new health and privacy concerns, CNET has learned.
Even though a public outcry has prompted Homeland Security to move away from adding X-ray machines to airports--it purchased 300 body scanners last year that used alternative technology instead--it appears to be embracing them at U.S.-Mexico land border crossings as an efficient way to detect drugs, currency, and explosives.
A 63-page set of specifications (PDF), heavily redacted, obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center through the Freedom of Information Act, says the scanners must "be based on X-Ray or gamma technology," which use potentially dangerous ionizing radiation at high energies, and "shall be capable of scanning cars, SUVs, motorcycles and buses."
Link
Oh, and dont worry bout cancer from the radiation. We're from the government. We'll take care of you.
16 January 2012
Quote of the Day, 1/15/2012 (repost)
"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction.
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature.
They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty... and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer?
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree."
Cesare Beccaria, Italy, 1738-1794, author of "Of Crimes and Punishments", widely read by the founders of the United States.
This is the position of modern 2nd amendment proponents. It has been demonstrably true for centuries. Laws primarily affect those who obey them.
It doesn't matter how many laws are on the books. Bad guys are bad guys.
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature.
They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty... and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer?
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree."
Cesare Beccaria, Italy, 1738-1794, author of "Of Crimes and Punishments", widely read by the founders of the United States.
This is the position of modern 2nd amendment proponents. It has been demonstrably true for centuries. Laws primarily affect those who obey them.
It doesn't matter how many laws are on the books. Bad guys are bad guys.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)