Law

Source: George Washington's Blog

Democratic and Republican congress members are sounding the alarm: tyranny is here.

For example:

• Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) says:

“I have been thrown out of more meetings in this capital in the last 24 hours than I ever thought possible, as a duly elected representative of 825,000 citizens of north Texas.”

Burgess asks the Speaker of the House to post the bailout bill on the internet for at least 24 hours instead of passing the largest piece of legislation in US financial history in the “dark of night.”

Rep. Burgess’ says, “Mr. Speaker I understand we are under martial law as declared by the speaker last night.”

• Congresswoman Kaptur (D-OH) says:

“My message to the American people don’t let Congress seal this deal. High financial crimes have been committed.

The normal legislative process has been shelved. Only a few insiders are doing the dealing, sounds like insider trading to me. These criminals have so much political power than can shut down the normal legislative process of the highest law making body of this land.

We are Constitutionally sworn to protect and defend this Republic against all enemies foreign and domestic. And my friends there are enemies.

The people pushing this deal are the very ones who are responsible for the implosion on Wall Street. They were fraudulent then and they are fraudulent now.”

Of course, there are many other indications that tyranny has already come to Amerca, including the permanent stationing of U.S. troops inside the country to quell "civil unrest" and the probable suspension of normal constitutional government for a state of emergency "continuity of government" operation.

Indeed, many people, including high-level politicians, have been warning of tyranny in the U.S. for some time.

As two of many examples:

• Former prominent republican congressman Bob Barr stated that the U.S. is close to becoming a totalitarian society and that the Bush administration is using fear to try to ensure that this happens.

• Current U.S. Congressman Ron Paul stated, the government "is determined to have martial law", and that the government is hoping to get the people "fearful enough that they will accept the man on the white horse"

Do you know the real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments in a Courthouse?

You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of lawyers, judges and politicians! It creates a hostile work environment.

Source: The International PGP

It's personal. It's private. And it's no one's business but yours. You may be planning a political campaign, discussing your taxes, or something even more sensitive. Or you may be doing something that you feel shouldn't be illegal, but is. Whatever it is, you don't want your private electronic mail (E-mail) or confidential documents read by anyone else. There's nothing wrong with asserting your privacy. Privacy is as apple-pie as the Constitution.

Perhaps you think your E-mail is legitimate enough that encryption is unwarranted. If you really are a law-abiding citizen with nothing to hide, then why don't you always send your paper mail on postcards? Why not submit to drug testing on demand? Why require a warrant for police searches of your house? Are you trying to hide something? You must be a subversive or a drug dealer if you hide your mail inside envelopes. Or maybe a paranoid nut. Do law-abiding citizens have any need to encrypt their E-mail?

What if everyone believed that law-abiding citizens should use postcards for their mail? If some brave soul tried to assert his privacy by using an envelope for his mail, it would draw suspicion. Perhaps the authorities would open his mail to see what he's hiding. Fortunately, we don't live in that kind of world, because everyone protects most of their mail with envelopes. So no one draws suspicion by asserting their privacy with an envelope. There's safety in numbers. Analogously, it would be nice if everyone routinely used encryption for all their E-mail, innocent or not, so that no one drew suspicion by asserting their E-mail privacy with encryption. Think of it as a form of solidarity.

Today, if the Government wants to violate the privacy of ordinary citizens, it has to expend a certain amount of expense and labor to intercept and steam open and read paper mail, and listen to and possibly transcribe spoken telephone conversation. This kind of labor-intensive monitoring is not practical on a large scale. This is only done in important cases when it seems worthwhile.

More and more of our private communications are being routed through electronic channels. Electronic mail is gradually replacing conventional paper mail. E-mail messages are just too easy to intercept and scan for interesting keywords. This can be done easily, routinely, automatically, and undetectably on a grand scale. International cablegrams are already scanned this way on a large scale by the NSA.

Source: Torrentfreak

A recent audit of computer systems belonging to the South Australia Police has found that hundreds are being used to “share” films. In a move smacking of hypocrisy though, officers involved will not be charged.

According to The Australian, during an audit of computer systems by the South Australian police force’s IT branch, police computers belonging to hundreds of police officers were found to contain movies.

The origin of these movies is not clear, but it is probable that they’ve been downloaded via p2p at some point, either on these systems, or on the personal systems of officers and transferred over.

Senior officials of the SA police force have been made aware of the findings, including its commissioner Mel Hyde. However, police sources have told press that there will not be any investigation into this, citing the large numbers of police officers involved.

The Australian Federation against Copyright Theft (AFACT) has said it will write to the commissioner to seek an explanation, presumably as to why the police officers are being let off with what it considers a heinous crime. Quite ironically, AFACT boasts of “working closely with police” - perhaps this closeness has shown the police officers involved just how unimportant and meaningless this so-called ‘crime’ is in the grand scheme of things.

Otherwise a good documentary, but the film praises Christ as God, when Christ is only God's eldest son and his servant - not God himself.

Sura 5:75. They do blaspheme who say: "("I AM") is Jesus the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! Worship God, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with God,- "I AM" will forbid him the Garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.
5:76. They do blaspheme who say: "I AM" is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous Penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

http://jahtruth.net/kofkad.htm

Source: BBC

Tens of thousands of children are being fingerprinted in school - often without the consent of their parents, a human rights group has complained.

Prints are taken for a library lending system which the makers say makes lending more efficient and less vulnerable to abuse.

But the pressure group Privacy International says the practice is illegal and breaches the human right to privacy.

They banned guns and the gun-crime rate soared.

They banned knives and the knife-crime rate soared.

Why? Because when the honest people are disarmed the criminals know they cannot defend themselves against armed criminals.

Simple common-sense logic, that stupid politicians don’t have. -- JAH

Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not ADD unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the Commandments of the "I AM" your God which I COMMAND you.