Government

Source: TimesOnline

Everyone who buys a mobile telephone will be forced to register their identity on a national database under government plans to extend massively the powers of state surveillance.

Phone buyers would have to present a passport or other official form of identification at the point of purchase. Privacy campaigners fear it marks the latest government move to create a surveillance society.

A compulsory national register for the owners of all 72m mobile phones in Britain would be part of a much bigger database to combat terrorism and crime. Whitehall officials have raised the idea of a register containing the names and addresses of everyone who buys a phone in recent talks with Vodafone and other telephone companies, insiders say.

The move is targeted at monitoring the owners of Britain’s estimated 40m prepaid mobile phones. They can be purchased with cash by customers who do not wish to give their names, addresses or credit card details.

The pay-as-you-go phones are popular with criminals and terrorists because their anonymity shields their activities from the authorities. But they are also used by thousands of law-abiding citizens who wish to communicate in private.

Source: George Washington's Blog

If a bully threatens to beat up a skinny kid if he doesn't give him his lunch money, and the bully doesn't have to follow through because the kid does fork it over, does that mean that the aggressive kid isn't a bully?

Of course not. He's a bully because he threatened to beat up the skinny kid and used coercion to get his way.

Well, Congressman Sherman said that congress was threatened with martial law this week. Specifically, he says that Congress was told martial law would be imposed if they didn't pass the Paulson bailout proposal.

Martial law means that the separation of powers which the Founding Fathers enshrined in the Constitution are destroyed, and an all-powerful executive branch calls the shots.

Is the threat of imposing martial law any different than actually imposing it?

No. Congress is just like the skinny kid.

Just because it forked over $700 billion or more in our lunch money based upon coercion by the thugs in the executive branch doesn't mean that the thugs are still following the separation of powers or anything else in the Constitution.

Remember that, for years, Congress has operated under "martial law" provisions which force Congress members to vote on legislation without having time to adequately read and review it.

Remember also that the U.S. has been in a declared state of national emergency for 7 years, and normal constitutional provisions were probably long ago superseded.

As University of California Berkeley Professor Emeritus Peter Dale Scott has warned:

"The systems of checks and balances established by the U.S. Constitution would seem to be failing.

To put it another way, if the White House is successful in frustrating [Congress' requests], then [the declared state of emergency] has arguably already superseded the Constitution as a higher authority."

And remember that U.S. troops are being stationed inside the U.S. to suppress "civil unrest".

Whether or not there is martial law in name, there is martial law in fact.

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"

Source: Wired

Federal agents at the border do not need any reason to search through travelers' laptops, cell phones or digital cameras for evidence of crimes, a federal appeals court ruled Monday, extending the government's power to look through belongings like suitcases at the border to electronics.

The unanimous three-judge decision reverses a lower court finding that digital devices were "an extension of our own memory" and thus too personal to allow the government to search them without cause. Instead, the earlier ruling said, Customs agents would need some reasonable and articulable suspicion a crime had occurred in order to search a traveler's laptop.

On appeal, the government argued that was too high a standard, infringing upon its right to keep the country safe and enforce laws. Civil rights groups, joined by business traveler groups, weighed in, defending the lower court ruling.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government, finding that the so-called border exception to the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches applied not just to suitcases and papers, but also to electronics.

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

"THEY like to push the weak around"

Discover The ONLY Way to defeat the THEM