ARTICLE 1
Santa Ana City Council establishes a term limits committee – Posted by Art Pedroza on July 17th, 2012
Tonight’s Santa Ana City Council meeting, which was held at the SAPD’s Community Room, was, as predicted, a real zoo. Media vans and news crews were everywhere and residents and out of town bloggers packed the proceedings.
As we stated in an earlier post, Council Member Carlos Bustamante, who is facing serious felony sex crime and public theft charges, was not likely to show up, and he didn’t. This is his second unexcused absence. After sixty days of not showing up to work, at City Hall, the City Council can
dump him and appoint someone to fill out his term.
Three City Council members — Michele Martinez, Sal Tinajero and Vince Sarmiento — have called for Bustamante’s resignation, according to the L.A. Times. Predictably Bustamante’s longtime ally, David Benavides is not calling for Bustamante’s resignation. Is anyone surprised by that?
Bustamante and Benavides flew to Washington D.C. together, back in the day, to attend a Cinco de Mayo event put on by past President George W. Bush. They were pals and together they served at the whim of the Usual Suspects. Why would Benavides turn on his amigo now?
The Santa Ana City Council agreed tonight to form an Ad Hoc Committee to explore the term limit issue raised by Martinez, who placed the term limit issue on tonight’s agenda as an 85 A item. The Ad Hoc Committee will include Martinez and her colleagues Sarmiento and Benavides. They
have to get a ballot measure hammered out by the next City Council meeting if they want to make the November ballot.
As expected, the Usual Suspects showed up to rip Mayor Pro Tem Claudia Alvarez, but she let them have it, and then pointed out that Councilman David Benavides “had invited speakers to address the council on the lawsuit over Measure D, while pointing our reports of attacks on her by
Benavides and Bustamante,” according to the O.C. Register. Of course we appreciated the referral!
And what is going on? Well, if the lawsuit filed by Santa Ana Parks and Rec Commissioner Max Madrid succeeds, then the Santa Ana City Clerk will be compelled by the Court to give nomination papers to Alvarez. She will then run for Ward 5 and win, period. I fully expect SAUSD Trustee
Roman Reyna to run for reelection to the SAUSD School Board rather than face off with Alvarez, who already spanked him once in a previous Council election. I am already seeing Reyna political signs around town – and they don’t mention the office he is running for. LOL! That Reyna is so
thrifty. He printed one batch of signs that he can now use for either race.
We revealed yesterday that the only announced opponent to Alvarez, Karina Onofre, has in fact become a registered Republican. She was also at tonight’s meeting, where she bragged that her Council campaign now has a billboard, somewhere on Main St. Apparently Santa Ana Council
Member Sal Tinajero met with her earlier this year and he advised her to run instead for the SAUSD School Board. He even offered to back her. But she stubbornly refused to do so and instead she dumped the Democratic Party and became a Republican. Good luck with that…
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The TLC ( term limits committee) could also double up as a ‘Family Blocs in Politics Watchdog’, and ‘Crony Capitalism Watchdog’ as well. All are ETHICS related. Try the below for China’s disciplined approach against nepotism :
See below link for more :
4 Articles on China – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 16th March 2012
http://www.examiner.com/article/mayor-gray-defiant-despite-calls-for-resignation
ARTICLE 2
Bloomberg’s Term Limits : 3 for Him, but Only 2 for Everyone Else – by MICHAEL BARBARO and DAVID W. CHEN – October 25, 2010
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg thinks that being able to serve three terms in office is a good idea — just not for anyone else. – Eric Michael Johnson for The New York Times – Louis Lanzano/Associated Press
On Monday, in an unexpected confession, Mr. Bloomberg said he wanted to reverse the changes to the city’s term-limits law, which he successfully campaigned for in 2008. Those changes are now the subject of a little-publicized ballot initiative on Election Day.
The mayor said he would vote to restore a limit of two terms, down from three, and to ban the City Council from rewriting the rule for sitting elected officials, closing a legislative loophole that Mr. Bloomberg exploited in his quest to remain in office beyond eight years. The results of the ballot
initiative would not affect Mr. Bloomberg, but would affect his successors.
During a news conference, the mayor said that the term-limits initiative, which will appear on the back of the paper ballots on Nov. 2, was imperfect and badly designed, but that he would support it anyway.
“It’s better than what we have now,” Mr. Bloomberg said, without explaining why or acknowledging that his administration had written the existing law and heavily advocated for it.
It was the latest installment in the story of Mr. Bloomberg’s ever-evolving relationship with term limits. An outspoken supporter of two terms, he once called Council members who proposed extending them “disgraceful.” Then, as his own time in office wound down, he reversed himself and
advocated for three terms, saying they offered voters greater choice.
“You can make that case for two terms or three terms,” he said at the time. “In this case, after listening to everybody, I’ve been convinced that three terms is right.”
Now he seems to have settled on something of a compromise: three terms for him, and only him.
Mayoral allies pointed out that Mr. Bloomberg had kept his word by bringing the issue back to voters, who originally passed the two-term limit in a 1993 referendum, only to watch it be dismantled by the mayor and the Council.
Mr. Bloomberg’s sudden support for two terms puts him in line with most New Yorkers. A New York Times poll, conducted in August, found that nearly three-fourths of city voters favored undoing Mr. Bloomberg’s 2008 actions.
The mayor’s change of opinion will avert a showdown with a fellow billionaire, Ronald S. Lauder, the father of the city’s original 1993 law, who has opened his wallet to sponsor a commercial urging New Yorkers to vote for a return to two terms.
The advertisement, which will be broadcast over the next few days, instructs voters — with a wry tagline — to turn over their ballots to find the term-limits question and vote yes. “Flip over the ballot,” a narrator says, “and flip off the politicians.”
MICHAEL BARBARO
Guilt by Association?
Hardly a day goes by without the two leading candidates for New York governor, Andrew M. Cuomo and Carl P. Paladino, accusing each other, either on the campaign trail or in their advertising, of being the worst kind of Albany insider.
But now, they have expanded their universe of ill repute to include the people with whom they supposedly associate, too.
In dueling advertisements that were first broadcast over the weekend, the two paint each other as being uncomfortably close with people who have run afoul of ethical and legal standards.
In his advertisement, Mr. Paladino highlights Steven L. Rattner, the financier who recently reached a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission over his role in a New York pension fund kickbacks scandal; Andrew L. Farkas, the real estate magnate; and State Senator Pedro Espada
Jr., who recently lost his bid for re-election in the Democratic primary. “Albany insider Cuomo won’t clean up Albany,” the advertisement says.
Mr. Paladino is no stranger to trying to associate Mr. Cuomo with Albany insiders whom he considers to be ethically challenged. Just before the Sept. 14 primary, in a mailer that literally smelled like a garbage dump, Mr. Paladino lumped together Gov. David A. Paterson and Representative
Charles B. Rangel, both Democrats, as prime examples of officials responsible for bad government.
The ad strains credulity a bit, since Mr. Cuomo is not known for being particularly close to either Mr. Rattner or Mr. Espada. But Mr. Cuomo has had a rollercoaster of a relationship with Mr. Farkas: first as an adversary, when Mr. Cuomo was the nation’s housing secretary and investigated Mr.
Farkas for kickbacks to a landlord; then as an ally, when Mr. Cuomo got not just a job from Mr. Farkas, but also hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions.
Mr. Cuomo did not take long to hit back. In two similar advertisements released on Sunday, Mr. Cuomo criticized Mr. Paladino for surrounding himself with top campaign aides with checkered pasts. These include Michael R. Caputo, his campaign manager, who has failed to pay almost $53,000 in
federal taxes over the past few years, and John F. Haggerty Jr., a political strategist, who was indicted this summer by the Manhattan district attorney, and was accused of stealing $1.1 million from the last candidate he backed, Mr. Bloomberg.
“You can’t clean up Albany with dirty hands,” concludes the ad, which is one of the toughest ones Mr. Cuomo has released.
Mr. Caputo has said that Mr. Paladino appreciated the can-do spirit of his closest supporters, and considered them to be “junkyard dogs, not pedigreed poodles.” DAVID W. CHEN
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Trying to stick out in the history books eh? More than 2 terms? GTFO of Congress! That goes for USA’s term limitless seat holder Senators, Reps and Congressmen as well!
http://www.termlimits.org/
http://flatermlimits.blogspot.com/2011/08/florida-house-resolution-calls-for.html
ARTICLE 3
Increase in ‘professional politicians’ means one in seven MPs have never done a real job (and that includes Ed Miliband) – by Jason Groves – PUBLISHED: 23:54 GMT, 18 July 2012 | UPDATED: 00:09 GMT, 19 July 2012
Labour leader Ed Miliband has little to no experience of a working life outside politics
One in seven MPs have never had a proper job, according to research.
And in addition to those who have absolutely no experience of working in the real world, many more have served only brief stints as lobbyists or public relations advisers before entering politics full-time.
The study by the House of Commons Library reveals a dramatic rise in the number of so-called professional politicians, whose numbers have increased almost four-fold over the past 30 years.
Ninety MPs have never held a job outside politics, against 20 in 1982.
The trend is led by Labour, which has twice as many MPs who have never worked outside politics as either the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats.
Labour leader Ed Miliband is among those who have never had a significant job outside politics.
Instead, he served a long apprenticeship as a special adviser to Gordon Brown.
Another is Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who worked for a year as a Brussels lobbyist and dabbled for a few months in journalism before taking a job with the European Commission.
The study also reveals that working class MPs, who played a key role in the politics of the last century, have become an endangered species.
Former independent MP Martin Bell said the figures highlighted a dangerous trend, which had left modern politicians increasingly disconnected from real life.
Not alone: Ed Miliband is not the only senior Labour politician who lacks non-politics work on his CV: Both Ed Balls and his wife Yvette Cooper were journalists before entering politics
‘It is a very dangerous development,’ the former BBC war reporter said. ‘One of the effects is that there is a growing gulf between politicians and the people, the government and the governed.
‘Another damaging result of the rise of the professional politician is that we send our armed forces too war far too nonchalantly because there are very few people with any experience of armed conflict.
‘Politics has become an attractive career for some bright young things who see it as a job for life. The trouble is that it leaves them prisoners of the party machine. They know that if they are deselected they are unemployable because they have never had a proper job. That leaves them at the mercy of the whips.’
The analysis by the Commons Library shows that 90 MPs have never held a job outside politics, compared to just 20 in 1982. Of these 52 are Labour MPs, 31 are Tories and seven are Lib Dems. In total, a fifth of Labour MPs are now professional politicians, compared to a tenth of Conservatives.
Other senior Labour figures who have little experience outside politics include the Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, who worked briefly as a journalist before becoming a Labour MP, and her husband, the Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls, who worked as a journalist for four years before serving a decade-long apprenticeship to Gordon Brown.
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg worked as a journalist and lobbyist for a brief period of time before taking a job with the European Commission
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg is another with little experience outside politics, having worked for a year as a Brussels lobbyist and dabbled for a few months with journalism before taking a job with the European Commission.
David Cameron worked in a public relations role for seven years at Carlton Television before becoming an MP in 2001. But he had already cut his teeth at Westminster during several years as a Tory adviser.
Shadow Cabinet Office Minister Jon Trickett said this week that about a quarter of MPs had been ‘full-time politicos already’ before entering Parliament.
Mr Trickett said Labour was keen to recruit more working class MPs in future, saying it was ‘important that our MPs reflect all the different parts of our country’.
But the latest research reveals that working class MPs have all but disappeared from Westminster. Just 25 former manual workers were elected as MPs in 2010, compared to 98 in 1979. Almost all of them are Labour MPs.
By contrast, the number of MPs from white collar backgrounds has increased from just nine in 1979 to 84 today. The number of teachers has halved to just 24, but the number of lawyers has declined only slightly to 86.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
This is the problem with TERM LIMITLESS ‘Careerist’ political oligarchy that ends up with political satrapies that result in JFKs or Bhuttos Assassinations or Ampatuan Massacres. The fastest way to end democracy is to allow TERM LIMITLESS nepotism in government. Before the voters know, suddenly all MPs or Congressmen’s seats will be handed down to family members and democracy would have been replaced with a political feudalism no different from before the French Revolution or American War of Independence. There will be no way to displace these oligarchs and plutocrats except by violence AGAIN . . .
Anyone who writes laws that do not include term limits in government posts that allow amendments of laws (a great power that no citizen should be allowed to hold too long – too often today’s MPs and Governors or lawmakers end up withholding much needed amendments of laws – much in the manner the same term limitless types create loopholes that allow collusion with crony capitalists, Military Industrial Complex, Prison-Supplier-Contractor Complex – they keep bad laws in place to enrich this group, Education-Loan-Debt-Banker Complex etc..), or boldfacedly approves family members ‘taking over’ after themselves, give themselves ‘Parliamentary privileges’ off the people’s taxes, or wages far above the average-wage, are in effect unethical and greedy closet dictators and profiteers much like the 1%, off a flawed system.
Worse still are the deadwood of 2 generations past WITH family blocs to boot keeping the country stagnant via profiteering, outmoded legal and even outmoded Human Rights mindsets like fundamentalism or Forced Military Conscriptions, refusal to amend bad laws, with the very worst keeping APARTHEID alive, amongst other bad things ‘old school’ and careerist politicians (more so if ALSO old aged and TERM LIMITLESS and with family blocs . . .) represent and take away from the 99% of voters.
ARTICLE 4
It’s legal: cops seize cell phone, impersonate owner – Court says sending texts using a seized iPhone doesn’t violate privacy rights. – by Timothy B. Lee – Jul 19, 2012 3:03 pm UTC
In November 2009, police officers in the state of Washington seized an iPhone belonging to suspected drug dealer Daniel Lee. While the phone was in police custody, a man named Shawn Hinton sent a text message to the device, reading, “Hey whats up dogg can you call me i need to talk to you.” Suspecting that Hinton was looking to buy drugs from Lee, Detective Kevin Sawyer replied to the message, posing as Lee. With a series of text messages, he arranged to meet Hinton in the parking lot of a local grocery store—where Hinton was arrested and charged with attempted possession of heroin.
Hinton wasn’t Sawyer’s only target. According to a court decision summing up the facts, “Sawyer spent about 5 or 10 minutes looking at some of the text messages on the iPhone; he also looked to see who had been calling. Many of the text messages that Lee’s iPhone had received and stored were from individuals who were seeking drugs from Lee.”
So Sawyer texted one of the individuals on the list and asked him if he “needed more.” The individual, Jonathan Roden, replied, “Yeah, that would be cool. I still gotta sum, but I could use some more. I prefer to just get a ball, so I’m only payin’ one eighty for it, instead of two Ts for two hundred, that way.” (The court helpfully explained that a “ball” is “a drug weight equivalent to approximately 3.5 grams.”)
But can cops legally do this with seized cell phones? When their cases went to trial, Hinton and Roden both argued that Sawyer had violated their privacy rights by intercepting, without a warrant, private communications intended for Lee.
But in a pair of decisions, one of which was recently covered by Forbes, a Washington state appeals court disagreed. If the decisions, penned by Judge Joel Penoyar and supported by one of his colleagues, are upheld on appeal, they could have far-reaching implications for cell phone privacy.
“No longer private or deserving of constitutional protection”
“There is no long history and tradition of strict legislative protection of a text message sent to, displayed, and received from its intended destination, another person’s iPhone,” Penoyar wrote in his decision. He pointed to a 1990 case in which the police seized a suspected drug dealer’s pager as an example. The officers observed which phone numbers appeared on the pager, called those numbers back, and arranged fake drug purchases with the people on the other end of the line.
A federal appeals court held that the pager owner’s Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure were not violated because the pager is “nothing more than a contemporary receptacle for telephone numbers,” akin to an address book. The court also held that someone who sends his phone number to a pager has no reasonable expectation of privacy because he can’t be sure that the pager will be in the hands of its owner.
Judge Penoyar said that the same reasoning applies to text messages sent to an iPhone. While text messages may be legally protected in transit, he argued that they lose privacy protections once they have been delivered to a target device in the hands of the police. He claimed that the same rule applied to letters and e-mail. (Police would still need to seize or search a phone or computer legally, and phones are much easier for cops to seize than computers, which generally require a warrant.)
“On his own iPhone, on his own computer, or in the process of electronic transit, Hinton’s communications are shielded by our constitutions,” he wrote, referring to both the state and federal constitutions. “But after their arrival, Hinton’s text messages on Lee’s iPhone were no longer private or deserving of constitutional protection.” Penoyar rejected Roden’s privacy arguments on similar grounds.
Unsettled law
Mobile phones exist in a constitutional grey area. The law has well-developed doctrines protecting the privacy of our desktop computers, landline telephones, and filing cabinets. But modern cell phones perform all of these functions, and more. If the police are free to rummage through any cell phone that falls into their hands, every arrest would automatically give the police access to a treasure trove of private data that they would otherwise need a warrant, based on probable cause, to obtain.
The Washington State decision is not unprecedented. Last year, the California Supreme Court ruled that no warrant was required for the police to peruse a cell phone that was confiscated after its owner tried to sell ecstasy to an undercover police officer. In that case, the police obtained a text message that seemed to confirm the government’s case against the suspect. Two justices of the California Supreme Court dissented from the ruling.
One judge dissented from the Washington State rulings as well. “Sawyer engaged in a continuing search when he first searched the contacts list on Daniel Lee’s iPhone to find Hinton’s phone number,” wrote Judge Marywave Van Deren in her dissent. Sawyer “used Lee’s iPhone to send and receive messages from Hinton. Under these circumstances, I would hold that Sawyer was required to obtain a search warrant.”
In a slightly different context, the Obama administration has also held that the contents of cell phones enjoy constitutional protection. Earlier this year, the Department of Justice filed a brief in a Maryland case arguing that Baltimore police had violated a man’s constitutional rights—including his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure—when they seized his phone and deleted videos he had taken of the officers’ conduct.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Court says sending texts using a seized iPhone doesn’t violate privacy rights.
But this is also unethical and can cause immense economic and social harm, both of which are illegal and thus the word of the law has subsumed the spirit of the law. Law which is not whole and considers wording ONLY, above *spirit* and *intention* as well as “*due diligence* in study or consideration of the negative indirect or peripheral social and economic effects” of use of such phones, amounts to INJUSTICE. In this case only the wording of the law is adhered to. Sending texts using a seized iPhone is not legal otherwise. The Court has ruled wrongly and neglected the 3 other aspects listed above. Bad judgment!
ARTICLE 5
Judge’s fury at nightclub’s ‘kids’ nights’ for under 18s which ‘encourage drinking and drug-taking’ – By Anna Edwards – PUBLISHED: 11:11 GMT, 24 July 2012 | UPDATED: 13:34 GMT, 24 July 2012
Judge questions parents who allow their children to attend club nights
Attack comes after 13-year-old girl accused 30-year-old man of sexual assault after he gave her a lift
Bristol judge warns events pose ‘very real threat’ to youngsters
Scathing: Judge David Ticehurst questioned the motives of club organisers and parents who allowed their children to attend the events
A judge has attacked nightclubs for holding ‘kids’ nights’, warning that children who attend will be tempted to try alcohol and drugs.
Judge David Ticehurst’s scathing words came after a 13-year-old girl who attended an under-18s night made sexual assault allegations against a man who gave her a lift.
The respected judge, who sits at Bristol Crown Court, blasted nightclubs for hosting events which posed a ‘real danger’ to their young clientele.
He also called the club organisers ‘naive’ to assume youngsters would not drink at the alcohol-free events and claimed they would be more tempted to try drugs and ‘behave dangerously’.
Judge Ticehurst questioned the motives of the club organisers and parents who allow their children to attend such nights after hearing about the case of one schoolgirl.
Bristol Crown Court heard that the 13-year-old girl – who had drunk alcohol – had partied at Oceana nightclub in the city during a £10 ‘Love Social’ event aimed at under-18s.
Officers were called to look for the girl and a friend after they were reported missing at 1.30am after the event, which finished at 11pm. They were found at 5am.
Judge David Ticehurst halted the sexual assault trial, ruling that inconsistencies in evidence meant there was no case to answer against the accused 30-year-old man from Bristol.
But in making his ruling he said: ‘I want to say something about Oceana and its so-called kids’ night.
Love Social: Oceana nightclub, in Bristol, hosts under 18 nights which Judge Ticehurst said would encourage youngsters to try drink and drugs
‘That a nightclub should advertise and seek to attract children between the ages of 13 to 16 is in my view a regrettable step.
‘The club’s closing time of 11pm inevitably means that those attending will probably not be home until midnight or later.
‘. . . naive to assume that these youngsters will not drink alcohol even if it is not provided by the club.
‘ . . . naive to assume that they will not be tempted by other and more pernicious substances.
‘ . . . naive to assume that they may not be tempted to behave in a way that may be dangerous and damaging to them.’
Oceana, owned by entertainment giant Luminar, is a chain of 10 nightclubs situated around the country, with venues in cities including Leeds and Nottingham.
The Judge launched his attack after hearing details about a 13-year-old’s attendance at one of the nights, that charge youngsters £10 entry
The Judge launched his attack after hearing details about a 13-year-old’s attendance at one of the nights, that charge youngsters £10 entry
‘Love Social’ events – touted as ‘inspirational and credible clubbing’ for 13-17-year-olds – are held in numerous Luminar clubs.
Youngsters at the events can enjoy ‘the most awesome time’, with music, free soft drinks, a free cloakroom and free queue jump.
The events have a complete ban on alcohol, tobacco and gambling sales, a proof of age requirement and a strict code of conduct for staff and a child protection policy.
Teenagers who are believed to have consumed drugs or alcohol should not be allowed entry, the rules state.
But Judge Ticehurst said the events posed a ‘very real danger’ to children and said those who attended were ‘inevitably and mainly the most vulnerable’.
He added: ‘It is not difficult to imagine the type of parental support forthcoming from parents who are content that their 13, 14, 15 or even 16-year-olds should attend such a venue, whether it is in school time or holiday time.’
The judge went on to question whether the club – which charged 832 teens £10 for the event attended by the girl – was ‘doing it for the good of the children’.
He said: ‘In my judgement this case demonstrates all too readily the very real dangers of such a venue and its attractiveness to those who may need protection from themselves.’
Luminar was unavailable to comment.
A Love Social event was due to take place at the club tonight, with more planned for August, October and December.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
A list of required reading (some tests related), a ‘Night Club Maturity Test’ (NCMT) and a ‘Kid’s Licence’ should solve the issue. Parental consent is not the issue, The former is more important as even ADULTS or the aged, who fail the required reading or NCMT should be disallowed entry because the ‘adults’ have the maturity and mindset of children (read those who consistently get drunk or into fights again and again are the least matured . . . ) ! Amendment to law needed! If child has the intellectual and emotional maturity of an adult, thats an adult.
ARTICLE 6
‘I’m not protecting anyone that made my life a living hell’: Teen faces jail for tweeting names of two boys who sexually assaulted HER – by Daily Mail Reporter – PUBLISHED: 21:06 GMT, 21 July 2012 | UPDATED: 13:11 GMT, 22 July 2012
A 17-year-old sexual assault victim is facing a jail sentence for tweeting the names of her attackers in anger at their light punishment.
Savannah Dietrich named and shamed the boys on the social messaging site, writing: ‘There you go, lock me up. I’m not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell.’
The teenager told from Louisville, Kentucky told The Courier-Journal she was frustrated by what she feels is a lenient deal for her attackers.
Savannah Dietrich named and shamed the boys on the social messaging site, writing: ‘There you go, lock me up. I’m not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell’
Anger: Savannah Dietrich used a Twitter message to name and shame the boys who sexually abused her
MailOnline does not normally report the names of sexual assault victims, but Miss Dietrich and her parents say they do not want to shield her identity and want her case to be public.
The boys’ attorneys have asked a judge to hold Miss Dietrich in contempt for violating the confidentiality of a juvenile hearing and the judge’s order not to speak about it.
Miss Dietrich told the paper she was assaulted in August 2011 by two boys she knew when she passed out after drinking at a gathering. She learned months later that pictures of the assault were taken and shared with others.
‘For months, I cried myself to sleep. I couldn’t go out in public places,’ she told the newspaper, as her father and attorneys sat nearby. ‘You just sit there and wonder, who saw (the pictures), who knows?’
Miss Dietrich’s attorneys want her contempt hearing open to the media, arguing she has a First Amendment right to speak about her case and to a public hearing. The boys’ attorneys, however, have asked to keep the hearing closed.
The contempt charge carries a possible sentence of 180 days in jail and a $500 fine.
The boys pleaded guilty on June 26 to first-degree sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism. Miss Dietrich says she was unaware of a plea agreement until just before it was announced in court.
She could not say what the proposed punishment was because of the court order, but said she feels like it was a slap on the wrist. The teens are to be sentenced next month, and the judge could reject or modify the terms of the proposed agreement.
Dietrich cried when the judge at the Jefferson District Court told her she couldn’t talk about what had happened
When Judge Dee McDonald admonished everyone at the hearing not to speak about what happened in court or about the crime, Dietrich said she cried.
‘They got off very easy… and they tell me to be quiet, just silencing me at the end,’ she said.
Afterwards Miss Dietrich tweeted, ‘They said I can’t talk about it or I’ll be locked up… Protect rapist is more important than getting justice for the victim in Louisville.’
David Marburger, an Ohio media law specialist, said Dietrich should have tried to get the courts to vacate the gag order rather than simply violating it.
But Gregg Leslie, interim executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said Dietrich should ‘not be legally barred from talking about what happened to her. That’s a wide-ranging restraint on speech.’
Ms Leslie said this sort of issue is becoming more common.
‘In the past, people would complain to anyone who would listen, but they didn’t have a way to publish their comments where there would be a permanent record, like on Facebook and Twitter, for people to see worldwide,’ he said.
Miss Dietrich said she just needed to stand up for herself. ‘I’m at the point that if I have to go to jail for my rights, I will do it.’
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Mass tweet is wrong. At most and acceptable, is notice board or lamp post based poster campaigns centred around no more than perhaps a legally sanctioned 30 kms of the crime scene. A tweet reaches beyond the district and reaches the whole nation and world, making life impossible for the offenders to live new lives for what is a session of rough sex, though the emotional wounds are not really quantifiable or easy to restore. Repeat offenders though would end up with more and more ‘unliveable blacklisted areas of 30 km radiuses’. No jail for this woman though, that would be wasteful and retrogressive, though after an explanation about how a victim’s inner life destroyed by rape IS NOT justifiable or equitable for destroying the OUTER LIVES of the aggressors or related to the INNER LIVES of the aggressors which do not change even though the OUTER LIVES of the aggressors being destroyed would teach neither society not vitim nor aggressor how to behave or control themselves – an apology broadcast on the above issues should be made, the aggressors if internally unapologetic, could be put through gender sensitization courses at most.
Jail will not change anything except enrich prison contractor-supplier complex, shaming by society again makes no difference and could just create polarisation and a self righteous that becomes dangerous viciousness or self-justifying insanity, and if this socialised insanity justified upon the backs of both victim and aggressor gets into politics or mainstream society’s or even religion’s mindset, we end up with the laziness of a ‘drug everyone is a solution’ psychiatric establishment, abusing intentionally induced victims/profiteering off medications imposed by the psychiatric establishment, and increasingly punitive or materialistic based punishments (to justify the lack of forethought and consideration which 99% of the world, no thanks to anglo-legal system, have become unfeeling and fines money based, meaningless corporeal punishment and jail term obsessed systems or Orwellian control paradigm society) by magistrates and judges.’
Instead of humanization and betterment and a sincere opportunity to normalize for all parties concerned.. Victims and aggressors are victims of society, amend the laws or create niches and subcultures to ensconce all facets of personality than humanity can express (i.e. lively Red Light Districts with Rape Fetish Clubs should end the need to rape – this should be included in syllabus or citizen’s manual for social studies (i.e. if you feel like doing such and such – list the whole gamut of whatever supposedly grey area actions which might otherwise be criminal, for non-consensual activity – go to location x,y,z where some beautiful/ugly/scary/boring etc.. people will act out your fantasy for you without running afoul of the law etc..) instead of punishing and fining no end to enrich the Prison Supplier-Contractor Complex where cronies doubtless profit and kickback to the term limitless politicians . . .
Briefing Courses for victims on the above punishment paradigms and equitable consideration for the rapists like not tweeting should be given after the report. Punishment in the above case meanwhile could be a live rape scene involving the attackers being raped for the victim if the victim wants that (this is the cheapest though less pleasant quick fix punishment – courtesy of the low minded nature of the victim incidentally . . . just wanted the rapists to suffer), or the rapists could be put to work with any number of hours of work with victims of other rapists in a manner that humnizes the victims (choose people similar to the persons that the attackers are fond of, or who are family members or figures they respect, lookalikes for stars they like etc..).
ARTICLE 7
Anchorman and Modern Family star Fred Willard arrested after exposing himself at Hollywood adult movie theatre – by Daily Mail Reporter – PUBLISHED: 14:56 GMT, 19 July 2012 | UPDATED: 17:11 GMT, 19 July 2012
Arrested: Fred Willard exposed his genitals at an adult theatre last night
Actor Fred Willard was arrested last night of lewd conduct after exposing himself at an adult movie theatre.
The 78-year-old actor was taken into custody after being caught with his pants down and genitals exposed at Hollywood’s Tiki Theatre at around 8.45pm local time.
Willard – who has been married to wife Mary for 40 years – was later cited and a mug shot was taken, police told RadarOnline, adding that he was co-operative with authorities.
He was released from custody and is set to appear in court at a later date, the website reports.
According to TMZ, LAPD officers were conducting a ‘random walk-through’ of the premises – not a raid – as part of a routine inspection.
The three films currently showing at the cinema are Follow Me 2, a X-rated parody of The Client List and Step Dad No. 2.
Willard is know for his roles in Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle, Anchorman and Everybody Loves Raymond.
Scene of the incident: Willard was at the Tiki Theatre in Hollywood
Movie star: Seen here in the Anchorman alongside Will Ferrell
The actor portrayed the news director of the KVWN news channel in Ferrell’s 2004 movie.
In 2010 he received an Emmy nomination for Outstanding Guest Actor in a Comedy Series after making appearances in ABC’s Modern Family.
He played the part of Frank Dunphy, Phil Dunphy’s father.
And according to IMDB, Willard is rumoured to be in pre-production for a movie called The Yank.
In 1991 Hollywood actor Pee Wee Herman was infamously arrested for indecent exposure in an adult theatre in Florida, which ruined his career as children’s entertainer.
Emmy nod: He played a guest role in Modern Family as Frank Dunphy, seen here with Sofía Vergara Ed O’Neill
Married man: The actor has been married to wife Mary for 40 years
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The inside of any adult venues could well be considered ‘nudism allowed zones’ though the theatre could state that patrons should expect or that nude or semi-nude persons could be present. The same could be applied to red light districts as well. Allowed Nudism areas and non-Nudism areas INSIDE red light districts. What is the management’s view? Nakedness or semi-nakedness in a adult theatre may be in line with common sense, though a non-nudist version of the same adult venue should also exist.
ARTICLE 8
‘It was a really good shot’: What cannabis smoking thug told police after throwing his dog through TENTH FLOOR window – by Emma Reynolds – PUBLISHED: 15:15 GMT, 25 July 2012 | UPDATED: 15:39 GMT, 25 July 2012
Tied up dog in bathroom for four hours after it misbehaved
Returned at 3am and attacked the dog for relieving itself on the carpet
Diagnosed with schizophrenia after the episode
James Bray said he might have been ‘out of his depth’
Callous: James Bray looked unrepentant at Southend Magistrates’ Court today, where he was jailed for animal cruelty
A cannabis-smoking dog owner who killed his pet by throwing it out of a tenth floor window to ‘teach it a lesson’ has been jailed.
Sick James Bray, 24, launched his eight-year-old Staffordshire bull terrier, Deano, from his flat in Southend, Essex, after it made a mess on his carpet.
The innocent dog suffered multiple injuries and died as a result of extensive internal bleeding following the tragic incident on January 18 this year.
Bray made a rude gesture at the cameras as he arrived at Southend Magistrates Court today, wearing a short-sleeved white shirt and looked emotionless as lead magistrate Bill Thomas sentenced him to four months in prison.
The court heard how callous Bray tied up his dog in the bathroom of his flat for four hours after it had misbehaved.
When he returned to untie the dog at around 3am he found it had weed on the carpet.
He flew into a blind rage and attacked the dog before throwing it from the tenth-floor window.
Man pleads guilty to owning a dangerous dog after horrific attack by two crazed bull terriers which left TEN people injured and three needing plastic surgery
Bray called the police after launching his dog from the window and stunned officers by confessing to the sickening assault.
In police interview he told shocked officers: ‘It was a really good shot – I launched him by the scruff of his neck and he bounced off the window and went down.
‘Maybe I was just out of my depth with this dog.
‘Usually I’m really good with animals – I don’t drown kittens or salt slugs.
‘I got carried away and angry at the time.
Long way to fall: Bray launched the dog out of his flat window at 3am, having left the dog tied up fro four hours after smoking a cannabis joint
‘I don’t know what came over me – it must be some kind of evil in this world.’
Bray admitted to police he had smoked a two-inch cannabis joint on the evening of the attack but said he still completely understood that what he was doing would kill his pet.
He told bemused officers: ‘I was trying to teach it a lesson’.
This is a matter which will undoubtedly provoke public outrage. My client has put forward no attempt to excuse his behaviour and accepts what he has done was an evil thing to do.
– PAUL MARKHAM, DEFENCE
The heartless thug even tried to escape charges by claiming he had attacked the dog in self-defence after it had bitten him on the foot.
Police could not find any evidence the dog had attacked Bray.
Bray – who was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and was sectioned following the sickening attack – pleaded guilty to three charges of animal cruelty when he appeared at the same court in May. 2012
Paul Markham, defending, described the situation as ‘tragic’ but called on magistrates to consider a suspended jail sentence due to his client’s early guilty plea.
He said: ‘This is a matter which will undoubtedly provoke public outrage.
‘My client has put forward no attempt to excuse his behaviour and accepts what he has done was an evil thing to do.’
Magistrates refused to accept Bray’s defence and handed him the maximum sentence available for an animal cruelty offence.
Lead magistrate Bill Thomas said: ‘This is a horrendous incident which caused the death of a dog.
‘There is no evidence this was caused by your mental illness and must be dealt with on the merits of the case.’
He sentenced Bray to the maximum six months’ imprisonment – reduced by two months in recognition of his early guilty plea.
Bray was ordered to pay £500 costs to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and was disqualified from owning or keeping a pet for life.
Outside court, RSPCA Inspector Matthew Gough welcomed the prison sentence but called for tougher sentencing for animal cruelty offences.
He said: ‘I hope this sentence acts as a strong deterrent to show that any cruelty to animals will not be tolerated.
‘I think, given the mental health issues involved, the magistrates worked well within the guidelines.
‘It would be appreciated if the sentences made available to magistrates for these offences were harsher.’
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Cetaceans and Ruminants are no less intelligent than dogs, but when killed do not result in punishment. Other than ‘falling objects danger to passers by’ issue, if JB had killed and cooked the animal, would there have been an issue? If the animal was a ruminant then what? Only Bray didn’t cook the meat or cull humanely so the above line of thought does not apply . . .
Still, the jail term as punishment at cost to the taxpayers is wrong. And if no damage was done other than causing the public to be ‘psychically shocked’ (for the more sensitive at any rate – who could in the future be scanned for such sensitivity and insensitivity so that incongrous people could live away from each other), perhaps a more suitable ‘fine’ could be requiring Bray to relocate if this is likely to keep happening, or work at an animal shelter to accrue sufficient ‘warm feelings’from animals to exhonerate himself from his fellow horrified flat dwellers. Jail at cost to the taxpayers is entirely unrelated and helps nothing in teaching about animals and how to toilet train the same. Insult upon injury and not just against Bray, but against the taxpayers! Bad judgment!
ARTICLE 9
Memories Selectively, Safely Erased In Mice
ScienceDaily (Oct. 23, 2008) — Targeted memory erasure is no longer limited to the realm of science fiction. A new study describes a method through which a selected set of memories can be rapidly and specifically erased from the mouse brain in a controlled and inducible manner. New and old memories have been selectively and safely removed from mice by scientists.
“While memories are great teachers and obviously crucial for survival and adaptation, selectively removing incapacitating memories, such as traumatic war memories or an unwanted fear, could help many people live better lives,” says Dr. Joe Z. Tsien, brain scientist and co-director of the Brain & Behavior Discovery Institute at the Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine.
“Our work reveals a molecular mechanism of how that can be done quickly and without doing damage to brain cells,” says the Georgia Research Alliance Eminent Scholar in Cognitive and Systems Neurobiology.
Dr. Tsien’s research team, in collaboration with scientists at East China Normal University in Shanghai, were able to eliminate new and old memories alike by over-expressing a protein critical to brain cell communication just as the memory was recalled, according to research featured on the cover of the Oct. 23 issue of Neuron.
Dr. Tsien had already created a mouse that couldn’t form memories by eliminating the NMDA receptor, which receives messages from other neurons. He then garnered international acclaim by making “Doogie,” a smart mouse in which a subunit of the NMDA receptor is over-expressed. Younger brains have higher amounts of this NR2B subunit which leaves communication channels between brain cells open longer. That is why young people can learn faster than older adults.
This time he was examining downstream cascades of the NMDA receptor to learn more about memory formation. An abundant protein found only in the brain, called αCaMKII, was a logical place to look because it’s a major signaling molecule for the NMDA receptor. He found that when he over-expressed αCaMKII while a memory was being recalled, that single memory was eliminated.
Receptors such as the NMDA receptor are like front doors to cells, providing an opening for signaling molecules such as calcium. Synapses are the point of communication between two cells, and NMDA receptors are on the receiving end of the message. Like people, neurons change with the signals they receive. “Learning changes the way cells connect to each other,” says Dr. Tsien. To form a memory, the NMDA receptor is activated, which results in the insertion of AMPA receptors into those synapses and subsequent strengthening of the synaptic connections among hundreds of thousands of neurons. Scientists believe that αCaMKII plays an important role in the insertion of AMPA receptors into synapses during learning and subsequent strengthening of connections between neurons to create a memory.
Memory has four distinct stages: learning, consolidation, storage and recall. It has been difficult to dissect the molecular mechanisms of these stages because researchers lacked techniques to manipulate proteins quickly. For example, when researchers disable a gene suspected to play a role in the memory process, the deletion typically occurred throughout the entire period so it was impossible to tell which parts of processes were impaired. Previous technology would take several days to switch off a protein, which is the product of a gene.
So Dr. Tsien’s team developed a powerful chemical-genetic method that allows him to use a pharmacologic inhibitor to instantly turn αCaMKII off and on in a mouse that he genetically engineered to over express this signaling molecule. That enabled him to study exactly what happened if he threw off the natural balance during the retrieval stage.
Much as a war veteran remembers a fateful patrol when he was fired upon, mice can establish a very long-lasting emotional memory about a place if, for example, they receive a mild shock to the paws while there. The researchers showed if they over-expressed αCaMKII, this powerful memory was rapidly erased as the animals tried to retrieve them while other memories remained intact.
A similar approach was taken with object recognition memory, giving mice a couple of toys to play with then erasing their memory of one of them. “You will feel like every time, it’s a new toy,” says Dr. Tsien.
While the ability to rapidly erase a selective memory is exciting, he cautions that its translation to humans would be difficult at this stage. “We are barely at the foot of a huge mountain,” says Dr. Tsien. A possible strategy for humans would be a drug that mimics the αCaMKII over expression that researchers accomplished through genetic manipulation. Or, further downstream substrates that αCaMKII acts upon could become possible drug targets.
The research was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute on Aging and the Georgia Research Alliance.
DETAILS : Accession Number : ADA126870
Title : Retrograde Amnesia in Rats, Produced by Electron Beam Exposure.
Descriptive Note : Final rept. Jul-Sep 82,
Corporate Author : SCHOOL OF AEROSPACE MEDICINE BROOKS AFB TX
Personal Author(s) : Wheeler,Thomas G. ; Hardy,Kenneth A. ; Blick,Dennis W.
Report Date : FEB 1983
Pagination or Media Count : 33
Abstract : It has been demonstrated that electron beam exposure produces retrograde amnesia (RA). RA production was evaluated using a single trial avoidance task across a 10,000 dose range for 10 microseconds, 1 microsecond, and 0.1 microseconds pulsed exposures. The dose-response curve obtained at each pulse duration showed significant RA production. The most effective dose range was 0.1-10 rads at a dose rate of 1 million rad/sec. Our conclusion was that the RA effect might be due to sensory system activation which provided a novel stimulus that masked previous stimuli (produced RA).
Descriptors : *EXPOSURE(GENERAL), *RATS, *ELECTRON BEAMS, *AMNESIA, EXPERIMENTAL DATA, STRESS(PHYSIOLOGY), TEST METHODS, AVOIDANCE, LEARNING, DOSE RATE, MENTAL ABILITY, IONIZING RADIATION, RADIATION DOSAGE, RADIATION EFFECTS, ULCERS, SUBLETHAL DOSAGE.
Subject Categories : PSYCHOLOGY, ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY, RADIOBIOLOGY
Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
ARTICLE 10
Strobe Light Weapons – By David Hambling – May 14, 2008 | 6:59 pm |
Can so-called “flashlight” weapons really make you vomit? Or send you into an epileptic fit? I have a feature in New Scientist on non-lethal strobe devices — new arms, relying on flashing lights, like the “LED Incapacitator,” Peak Beam’s searchlight-based “Immobilization Device,” and Nanohmics’ non-pyrotechnic stun grenade. There is a great deal of debate over how well these devices work and what their effects are. That’s because the military’s tests have traditionally been more concerned with environmental health. But now, the military is sponsoring a whole range of tests which go well beyond previous studies. In the meantime, there are some myths we can clear up pretty quickly:
“It makes you vomit,” as popularized in by Fox News’ story, Flashlight Weapon Makes Targets Throw Up. Although disorientation, dizziness and nausea were quoted by all the designers as common effects, nausea is not the same as throwing up.
“I don’t think we’ve had anyone actually be sick”, says Bob Lieberman, CEO of Intelligent Optics, which makes the LED Incapacitator. In fact, nausea is not one of the immediate effects, but is more likely to occur afterwards – it doesn’t really contribute to the weapon’s effectiveness. Lieberman is philosophical about the ‘puke saber’ stories which are passed around the media, judging that the exposure is worth it. “We’re grateful that people have taken such an interest,” he says.
“It’ll make you have an epileptic fit.” People with photosensitive epilepsy (around four per thousand of the population) may have seizures triggered by flashing lights. But it turns out that the frequencies which trigger seizures can be avoided.
“Our products are engineered around this situation as to not endanger people with this condition,” says Will Harcourt, Peak Beam’s Director of Sales. Prof. Ley Sander, Professor of Neurology and Clinical Epilepsy at the Institute of Neurology of University College London, says that strobe devices are not be a risk to photosensitive epileptics if they have a pulse rate above 25 Hz.
MYTH : “If you shut your eyes it makes the weapon useless.” This one amuses everyone working in the field. If you close your eyes you can’t run away, you can’t fight back, aim a weapon or effectively resist arrest. You have immobilized yourself and made yourself helpless, which is exactly what the non-lethal weapon-makers have in mind. “If they close their eyes,” says Lieberman, “then I’ve got ‘em.”
He sees the LED Incapacitator as being close to the lowest rung of the ladder of force. It may not subdue a suspect every time, but even if it is effective some of the time and prevents officers from having to use a Taser or a firearm then it will be well worthwhile.
The new generation of strobe devices are lightweight, cheap and have an unlimited supply of ammo. Within a few years they could be everywhere – small ones in the hands of police, larger versions mounted on vehicles or drones. The Peak Beam Immobilizer is being mounted on the Vigilante, an unmanned helicopter. “Testing has also been conducted on our strobe against on-coming vehicles. [The testing organization] rated our Maxa Beam as the most effective non-lethal weapon against drivers that they have ever tested,” says Harcourt.
If they work as advertised, this could be the biggest advance in non-lethals since tear gas.
ARTICLE 11
DOJ to Colorado Family: Give Up Your Religion or Your Business – by Terence P. Jeffrey – July 26, 2012
(CNSNews.com) – The Justice Department last week presented the Newland family of Colorado–who own Hercules Industries, a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning business–with what amounted to an ultimatum: Give up your religion or your business.
“Hercules Industries has ‘made no showing of a religious belief which requires that [it] engage in the [HVAC] business,” the Justice Department said in a formal filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.
In response to the Justice Department’s argument that the Newlands can either give up practicing their religion or give up owning their business, the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing the family, said in a reply brief: “[T]o the extent the government is arguing that its mandate does not really burden the Newlands because they are free to abandon their jobs, their livelihoods, and their property so that others can take over Hercules and comply, this expulsion from business would be an extreme form of government burden.”
Now that the Supreme Court has upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and its mandate that individuals must buy health insurance, this suit which seeks to protect a small business from being forced to take actions that violate the moral and religious beliefs of the family that owns it is likely to be the next major court battle over Obamacare.
At stake is whether businesses are protected by the First Amendment—the part of the Bill of Rights that guarantees not only the free exercise of religion but also freedom of speech and of the press.
The Justice Department’s filing was made in Newland v. Sebelius–a suit brought by William, Paul and James Newland, and their sister, Christine Ketterhagen, who are Roman Catholics, and who together own Colorado-based Hercules Industries.
The Newland family founded Hercules in 1962 and have maintained it as a family-owned business ever since—growing it to the point where they now employ 265 people.
Eric Holder, Kathleen Sebelius
Attorney General Eric Holder and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
The Newlands’ lawsuit challenges a regulation that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius finalized earlier this year that requires virtually all health plans to cover–without cost-sharing–sterilizations and all Food-and-Drug Administration approved contraceptives, including those that induce abortions.
Under the Obamacare law, businesses that have more than 50 employees must provide health insurance to their employees or face a penalty. To satisfy the mandate, the insurance must include the cost-sharing-free sterilization-contraception-abortifacient benefit. The regulation takes effect on Aug. 1, which means that as soon as any business starts a new plan-year for its health-insurance program after that date it will need to comply with Sebelius’s rule.
The Catholic Church, to which the Newlands belong, teaches that sterilization, contraception and abortion are intrinsically immoral. Last month, the Catholic bishops of the United States unanimously adopted a statement declaring Sebelius’s regulation an “unjust and illegal mandate” and a “violation of personal civil rights.”
While much of the media attention on Sebelius’ regulation has focused on the fact that it will apply to famous Catholic religious institutions such as Catholic University and the University of Notre Dame, the Catholic bishops have repeatedly pointed out that the regulation also violates the First Amendment-protected religious liberty of lay Catholic individuals. That includes employees who will be forced to pay insurance premiums on insurance plans that violate the teachings of their faith and business owners who will be forced to provide such plans.
In their unanimous statement, the Catholic bishops declared that Sebelius’s regulation created a class of Americans “with no conscience protection at all: individuals who, in their daily lives, strive constantly to act in accordance with their faith and moral values. They, too, face a government mandate to aid in providing ‘services’ contrary to those values—whether in their sponsoring of, and payment for, insurance as employers; their payment of insurance premiums as employees; or as insurers themselves—without even the semblance of an exemption.”
The Newlands currently run a self-insurance plan, providing their employees with generous health-care coverage that is consistent with the teachings of the Newlands’ church in that it does not cover sterilizations, contraception and abortifacients. They are precisely among the class of people that the unanimous Catholic bishops said have “no conscience protection at all” under Sebelius’s regulation.
In their complaint against the Obama administration, which was prepared by the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Newlands clearly explained why they could not comply with Sebelius’s regulation without violating their religious faith.
“The Newlands sincerely believe that the Catholic faith does not allow them to violate Catholic religious and moral teachings in their decisions operating Hercules Industries,” says the complaint. “They believe that according to the Catholic faith their operation of Hercules must be guided by ethical social principles and Catholic religious and moral teachings, that the adherence of their business practice according to such Catholic ethics and religious and moral teachings is a genuine calling from God, that their Catholic faith prohibits them to sever their religious beliefs from their daily business practice, and that their Catholic faith requires them to integrate the gifts of the spiritual life, the virtues, morals, and ethical social principles of Catholic teaching into their life and work.”
“The Catholic Church teaches that abortifacient drugs, contraception and sterilization are intrinsic evils,” says the complaint. “As a matter of religious faith the Newlands believe that those Catholic teachings are among the religious ethical teachings they must follow throughout their lives including in their business practice.”
The Justice Department responded by arguing that if the Newlands’ Roman Catholic faith prevented them from following the Obama administration’s command that they provide their employees with cost-sharing-free coverage for sterilizations, contraception and abortion-inducing drugs, the Newlands could simply give up their business entirely.
The Justice Department further argued that people owning for-profit secular businesses do not have a First Amendment right to the free exercise religion in the way they conduct their businesses—particularly if their business is incorporated.
“Here, plaintiffs have not sufficiently alleged that the preventive services coverage regulations substantially burden their religious exercise,” the Justice Department told the court. “Hercules Industries, Inc., is not a religious employer; it is ‘an HVAC manufacturer.’”
“The First Amendment Complaint does not allege that the company is affiliated with a formally religious entity such as a church,” the Justice Department told the federal court. “Nor does it allege that the company employs persons of a particular faith. In short, Hercules Industries is plainly a for-profit, secular employer.”
“By definition,” the Justice Department claimed, “a secular employer does not engage in any ‘exercise of religion.’”
“Hercules Industries has ‘made no showing of a religious belief which requires that [it] engage in the [HVAC] business,” DOJ told the court. “Any burden is therefore caused by the company’s choice to enter into a commercial activity.”
In its brief responding to the Justice Department on behalf of the Newland family, the Alliance Defending Freedom forcefully rebutted the claim that the First Amendment does not apply to corporations let alone to family-owned businesses.
“The government argues that the Newlands forfeited their right to religious liberty as soon as they endeavored to earn their living by running a corporation,” said the Newlands’ brief.
“Nothing in the Constitution, the Supreme Court’s decisions, or federal law requires—or even suggests—that families forfeit their religious liberty protection when they try to earn a living, such as by operating a corporate business,” they argued.
If the Obama administration’s understanding of the First Amendment were accepted, argued the Alliance Defending Freedom’s brief, the media would have no rights either.
“The government’s exclusionary attitude would push religion out of every sphere of life except the four wall of a church,” they said in their brief. “If for-profit corporations have no First Amendment ‘purpose,’ newspapers and other media would have no rights.”
If they refuse to sell their businesses, families like the Newlands are trapped by the Sebelius regulation. They can stop providing health insurance to themselves and their employees through the business, but then they and their employees would still be required, under Obamacare’s individual mandate, to buy health insurance, and under the Sebelius regulation all the health insurance plans they would be able to buy would still be required to cover sterilizations, contraception and abortion-inducing drugs. Their premiums would then contribute to those “services,” and the business owners would still be required to pay a penalty to the government of about $2,000 per year for each employee they did not insure.
If businesses like the Newlands’ try to simply flout the Sebelius regulation and continue providing insurance to their workers that does not cover the sterilization-contraception-abortifacient benefits that the Obama administration demands, they will be hit with confiscatory financial penalties.
“PPACA also imposes monetary penalties if Hercules were to continue to offer its self-insured plan but continued omitting abortifacients, contraceptive and sterilizations,” said the Newlands’ complaint. “The exact magnitude of these penalties may vary according to the complicated provisions of PPACA, but the fine is approximately $100 per day per employee, with minimum amounts applying in different circumstances.
With 265 employees, a business like the Newlands’ would need to pay the government $26,500 per day if they decided not to comply with Sebelius’s regulation and insured their employees anyway. Over 365 days that would amount to $9,672,500.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The spiritual implications of using the name ‘Hercules’ and the unbalancing effect on the ether is the issue. Nothing else. Xians and other Monotheists though, are now infamous for this form of spiritually manipulative NLP method of ‘binding’ (abused in conjunction with the above ‘neurotech’), and USA being religion neutral has chosen to act to prevent any untoward incidents which could arise from use of the Grecian Pantheon’s gods’ name, a sort of ‘national faith system’, Cosmic copyright and right to exist issue is at hand here. No laws cover this so they are making do with the above. USA is much cleverer that the pretentious wanting to paint the USA as oppressive of religion or keep the ordinary occult unschooled people unaware of the deeper implications.
This is necessary or any untoward incidents in the future could also occur. That energy belongs to the original owner, NOT a machine. The extrication process of the ‘bound’ will not be as easy though USA’s ‘Augurs’ are probably the best in the world. The physical dimension of Earth is what we are allowed to see, being poisoned by vaccinnations to enable the ‘powerful’ to control the rest, but of late issue like the above are becoming increasingly intolerable and even vaccinations could be illegal. Other dimension wise any and all men are allowed to participate but with the above issues, the SPIRITUAL ABUSE of ordinary citizens in unbelievable as of now. See below article 12 for how only part of the truth is preached by cynical hierarchies of ‘religious’ who want to continue parasiting off the ordinary man . . .
ARTICLE 12
U.S. Bishops Prepare Catholics for Civil Disobedience: ‘We May Need to Witness to the Truth by Resisting the Law’ by Terence P. Jeffrey May 27, 2012
Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Pope Benedict XVI
Pope Benedict XVI makes New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan a cardinal on Feb. 18, 2012 at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini)
(CNSNews.com) – Having organized 43 plaintiffs—including the archdioceses of New York and Washington and the University of Notre Dame—to file 12 different lawsuits against the Obama administration last Monday alleging the administration is violating the religious freedom of Catholics, the Catholic bishops of the United States are now preparing Catholics for what may be the most massive campaign of civil disobedience in this country since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and early 1960s.
“Some unjust laws impose such injustices on individuals and organizations that disobeying the laws may be justified,” the bishops state in a document developed to be inserted into church bulletins in Catholic parishes around the country in June.
“Every effort must be made to repeal them,” the bishops say in the document, which is already posted on the website of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “When fundamental human goods, such as the right of conscience, are at stake, we may need to witness to the truth by resisting the law and incurring its penalties.”
The bulletin insert reminds Catholic parishioners that the bishops have called for “A Fortnight of Freedom”—which they have described as “a special period of prayer, study, catechesis, and public action”—to take place from June 21 to July 4.
St. Thomas More
The bishops have noted that June 21, when this fortnight will begin, is the Vigil of the Feast of St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More. Fisher was a Roman Catholic cardinal whom the English monarch Henry VIII beheaded in 1535 after he refused to act against his conscience and take an oath asserting that Henry was the supreme authority over the church in England. That same year, Henry VIII also beheaded Thomas More, his former chancellor, for the same reason.
The sterilization-contraception-abortifacient mandate is set to go into effect for most health-care plans on Aug. 1, about four weeks after the bishops’ “Fortnight of Freedom.”
In campaign speeches delivered this week after the Catholic dioceses and organizations filed their 12 lawsuits, both President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama indicated that the administration intends to move forward and enforce the mandate.
Mrs. Obama brought it up in a stump speech in Cleveland on Monday afternoon, less than three hours after the Catholic bishops had announced their lawsuits.
“You can tell people how, because we passed health reform, insurance companies will now have to cover preventive care–have to,” said Mrs. Obama. “Things like contraception, cancer screenings, prenatal care–and they have to do it at no extra cost. People have to understand that’s what that fight was for.”
President Obama signaled his personal commitment to enforcing the sterilization-contraception-abortifacient mandate, using virtually identical language about it in back-to-back campaign speeches Wednesday and Thursday in California and Iowa.
“We don’t need another political fight about ending a woman’s right to choose, or getting rid of Planned Parenthood or taking away affordable birth control,” Obama said. “We don’t need that. I want women to control their own health choices, just like I want my daughters to have the same economic opportunities as my sons. We’re not turning back the clock. We’re not going back there.”
Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
The bulletin insert the bishops have prepared to distribute in parishes around the country in June specifically references the late Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., who was imprisoned in Birmingham, Ala., on Good Friday 1963 for marching without a permit to protest the racist segregation laws enforced in Alabama in that period.
While detained, King, who was a Baptist minister, wrote his “Letter from the Birmingham Jail,” in which he said the moral justification for civil disobedience against Alabama’s segregation laws was derived from the writings of the Roman Catholic saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas.
“During the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, Americans shone the light of the Gospel on a dark history of slavery, segregation, and racial bigotry,” the Catholic bishops say in their bulletin insert. “The civil rights movement was an essentially religious movement, a call to awaken consciences.
“In his famous ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ in 1963,” the bishops says, “Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. boldly said, ‘The goal of America is freedom.’ As a Christian pastor, he argued that to call America to the full measure of that freedom was the specific contribution Christians are obliged to make. He rooted his legal and constitutional arguments about justice in the long Christian tradition: ‘I would agree with Saint Augustine that ‘An unjust law is no law at all.’… A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.’”
The bishops have argued that elements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—AKA Obamacare—including the so-called “preventive services” mandate, would force faithful Catholics to act against their consciences and the teachings of their church. The mandate requires that virtually all health-care plans in the United States cover, without any fees or co-pay, sterilizations and all Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.
The bishops also object to the manner in which Obamacare deals with abortion generally. In April, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a background paper explaining how Obamacare not only would use tax dollars to fund abortions but would also force Americans to pay for abortions with the premiums they would pay to purchase health insurance—which under Obamacare they are mandated to do. The backgrounder was titled, “The New Federal Regulation on Coerced Abortion Payments.”
Additionally, the bishops object to the so-called “religious” exemption to the mandate that requires all health-care plans cover sterilizations, contraceptives and abortifacients. That exemption only applies to “religious” organizations that are primarily focused on inculcating religious tenets and that serve and employ primarily members of their own denomination. This “religious” exemption would not extend to Catholic schools, universities, hospitals, and charitable organizations—and, the bishops argue, it violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by empowering federal bureaucrats to determine which religious institutions are truly “religious” and which ones are not.
In their bulletin insert, the bishops unequivocally state that the administration’s sterilization-contraception-abortifacient mandate would force people to act against their consciences.
“This is a matter of whether religious people and institutions may be forced by the government to provide such coverage even when it violates our consciences,” say the bishops.
“What we ask is nothing more than the right to follow our consciences as we live out our teaching,” they say.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius first announced the sterilization-contraception-abortifacient regulation last August. At that time, the bishops submitted formal comments to HHS, calling the regulation an “unprecedented attack on religious liberty” and asking the administration to rescind it in its entirety.
After Sebelius finalized the regulation in January, many Catholic bishops around the country asked their priests to read a letter from the pulpit at Sunday Masses that said: “We cannot–we will not–comply with this unjust law.”
Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who leads the Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services wrote a letter that he asked all Catholic chaplains to read at Sunday masses at U.S. military facilities across the globe. Broglio’s letter not only said “we will not” comply with the law, it also said: “It is a blow to a freedom that you have fought to defend and for which you have seen your buddies fall in battle.”
As reported by CNSNews.com, the Army told Army chaplains not to read this letter in Mass, a move that Archdiocese for the Military Services described as a violation of the First Amendment rights of Archbishop Broglio and Catholic chaplains.
In the April backgrounder, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop said that another regulation issued by the Obama administration in March of this year confirmed what the bishops had said about Obamacare when it was up for a vote in 2010 and they opposed its passage.
“While some have misunderstood or misrepresented the Act’s role in funding abortions, the new rule confirms that analyses by the Catholic bishops’ conference were accurate on this point,” said the backgrounder.
“Under this Act,” it says, “millions of American taxpayers will be forced to help support abortion coverage, in two ways: (1) Through their tax dollars all taxpayers will be forced to subsidize overall health plans that cover elective abortions, contrary to the policy of the Hyde amendment and every other major federal program, and (2) Many of these Americans will also be forced to pay directly for other people’s abortions. Some will say this is technically not ‘tax funding of abortions,’ because the required surcharge will be a premium payment rather than a tax payment as such. But what the payment is called is less important than what it actually does.”
The day after releasing this analysis, the bishops issued “A Statement on Religious Liberty,” that explained the Catholic belief that “an unjust law cannot be obeyed” and called for Catholics to join in what the bishops called “A Fortnight of Freedom” that will run from June 21 to July 4.
St. John Fisher
June 21, the bishops pointed out, is the vigil of the Feasts of St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More.
“We suggest that the fourteen days from June 21—the vigil of the Feasts of St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More—to July 4, Independence Day, be dedicated to this ‘fortnight for freedom’—a great hymn of prayer for our country,” said the bishops.
“Our liturgical calendar celebrates a series of great martyrs who remained faithful in the face of persecution by political power—St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More, St. John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, and the First Martyrs of the Church of Rome,” said the bishops. “Culminating on Independence Day, this special period of prayer, study, catechesis, and public action would emphasize both our Christian and American heritage of liberty.”
“It is a sobering thing to contemplate our government enacting an unjust law,” the bishops said. “An unjust law cannot be obeyed. In the face of an unjust law, an accommodation is not to be sought, especially by resorting to equivocal words and deceptive practices. If we face today the prospect of unjust laws, then Catholics in America, in solidarity with our fellow citizens, must have the courage not to obey them. No American desires this. No Catholic welcomes it. But if it should fall upon us, we must discharge it as a duty of citizenship and an obligation of faith.”
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The ‘miracles’ that religious organisations cause or inflict are ALL technology based. Ailments and cures are all inflicted at the whim and fancy of the faith or in the worse cases by family members etc. to somehow sequester naturally occurring spiritual energy of all persons not of the 1% and their cronies. technology has reached a very different stage now, and if we are not careful, this combined with the above technology will result in Techno/Spirit0-Facism from which none will ever know freedom from.
ARTICLE 13
Bloomberg: An alien mouth without a mind | Kirwan’s Art & Articles – “New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg told CNN’s Piers Morgan Cops Should Go on Strike until Americans give up their guns- Posted on July 28, 2012 by Jim Kirwan
“New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg told CNN’s Piers Morgan last night that he doesn’t “understand why police officers across this country don’t stand up collectively and say we’re going to go on strike, we’re not going to protect you unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what’s required to keep us safe.”
We’ve been hearing a lot of that recently. Earlier this year, The New York Times reprinted a Department of Justice press release and slapped this lead on top of it: “As violent crime has decreased across the country, a disturbing trend has emerged: Rising numbers of police officers are being killed.”
Bloomberg and The New York Times are both wrong:
In 2008, ten times more civilians regular people were killed by cops than cops were killed by perps.
In 2011, 72 cops were shot and killed in the entire U.S.; in L.A. County alone, cops shot and killed 54 suspects the same year–22 percent of those people were unarmed.
As Scott Reeder reported at Reason this morning, “Farmers, ranchers, commercial fishermen, loggers, garbage collectors, truck drivers, construction workers, pilots, steel workers, roofers, and others are far more likely to face death on the jobs than police or firefighters, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.”
And as Choire Sicha wrote earlier this year, “2008 was the ten-year low for police officers being killed, and 2012 is, so far, year-to-date, down 49% from last year.”
Bloomberg, the commander of “the seventh biggest army in the world” went on to say that “police officers want to go home to their families. And we’re doing everything we can to make their job more difficult, but more importantly, more dangerous, by leaving guns in the hands of people who shouldn’t have them and letting people who have those guns buy things like armor piercing bullets.”
The statistics say that the jobs of police officers are getting increasingly safer. After all, even the smallest departments now have access to battle-tested body armor, weaponry, vehicles, and unmanned drones; SWAT and raid training courtesy of outfits like Academi (the company formerly known as Blackwater now trains officers “who conduct warrant service, fugitive apprehension, SWAT operations and drug search warrants who are in need of sound tactics and techniques”); asset forfeiture funds from the Department of Justice; and a neutered-and-spayed 4th Amendment, courtesy of the United States Supreme Court.
Thanks to all of that, cops are more likely than ever to return safely to their families every night.” (1)
Bloomberg has become a raving mindless mouth, beset with verbal diarrhea that has never been connected to sentient thought in any meaningful way. And in this he has finally outdone himself in the smugness of his attitudes and the shape of his contempt for the American-public which he so fervently embraces.
The very idea that Bloomberg can safely suggest that the public he wants to kill can be blackmailed into surrendering the only reality that still stands between the criminal-state and mass murder – is an obscenity that should have choked off his words and yet he speaks of this as if it is a foregone conclusion. A ‘fact’ that of course the brain-dead will bow down to kiss his filthy ass, at the mere mention of this final insult from a formerly failed candidate for the presidency. Despicable is far too tame a term, for this member of the minor-elite who believes in both his infallibility and his personal entitlement to speak of such things as though they MUST come to pass—just because he said them, for the world to hear.
The truth is that the compact between those publicly-employed officers who wear a badge in this country do not represent any protection for the people they supposedly serve—rather they have become our unacknowledged judges, juries and executioners for the fear and paranoid tendencies of this unelected mob that rules by rumors and terror over a herd of mindless fools that have no idea of who their enemies truly are within the final hours of this failed state.
Much has been made of our inability to understand anything—yet everything that lives knows instinctively whenever life is threatened—except for twenty-first century members of the herd that still refuse to choose either life or death, in what remains of their pathetic lives.
“But what about the rest of us? What about Kelly Thomas, who screamed for his father while five cops beat him to death? Or Patricia Cook, shot to death by a deranged alcoholic with a badge? Or Andrew Scott, killed during a wrong-door raid? Or Nick Christie, gagged and pepper-sprayed to death by prison guards? Or Seth Adams, shot four times by a cop behind his family business, then left to die? Or Wendell Allen, who was unarmed when a New Orleans cop shot and killed him during a raid? Or Ramarley Graham, the 18-year-old New Yorker shot and killed by plainclothes cops for trying to flush a small bag of marijuana down the toilet? Or Kyle Miller, killed by Colorado police for waving a BB gun in the air? Or Todd Blair, killed by Utah police for raising a golf club above his head?
That’s a smattering of names from the last year or so. A complete list is impossible; though you could spend months culling names from local media outlets. It would be significantly longer if we included people who were shot, but didn’t die; or people who were just shot at by cops. It would be exponentially longer if we included people who were beaten, intimidated, wrongly arrested/incarcerated, or otherwise abused by police officers.
Didn’t these folks want to go home to their families? Didn’t they want to be safe when they were in their homes with their families?
They didn’t get memorials. Their hometowns didn’t shut down traffic for their funerals. The mayor didn’t speak at their prayer vigil, if they had a prayer vigil. Their congressmen did not speechify about them on C-SPAN. No one proposed laws in their honor. No city or state official called for a national conversation about anything.
In most cases, here’s what happened, and often happens: Cops who kill get a paid vacation, and the local district attorney, or state attorney determines that protocol was followed. The cop comes back with a tan and a mandate. A big ugly shrug is standard operating procedure.
Maybe Bloomberg is right; maybe America’s cops should go on strike.” (1)
Bloomberg fails to note that any of those people carrying badges now are even remotely restricted by any laws, when it comes to the way in which this nation is policed. Our ‘cops’ kill more of the public than all the criminal elements could ever do—and are rewarded with paid vacations instead of investigations that always find that these ‘officers’ followed a non-existent protocol wherein no one can ever be charged with any crime if the police are even remotely involved in any torture, harassment or murder of those they were supposedly created to protect, from the government as well as from other criminals. And now this insult beyond injury comes from an arrogant Zionist who is supposedly entitled to dictate to one and all because he is a proud member of the filthy-rich with a microphone.
Whether uniformed or undercover, thugs are not immune to the same laws that the rest of us are supposed to obey—in fact if anything because they wear life & death on both hips, they should be held to higher standards than the public they supposedly serve. The public has a right to be respected by those that carry any badge—instead the public have become nothing but half-dead-fish in a barrel which the cops choose to use and abuse as targets for their idle minds whenever they feel like killing people. Now they have decided that they no longer need to warn the public before they chose to shoot anyone to death—”IF THEY feel threatened in any way.”
The herd may be too terrified to respond as they should, but gun-owners are about to weigh in on this abusive and un-constitutional policy of disarming the public: When this happens a lot of these so-called cops will die, along with some very high-profile insiders and then the entire situation will be reversed: To finally reflect the natural balance that has been completely destroyed in the New Millennium.
All of this will come to pass, because nature will not tolerate the imbalance and neither will the world wherein all of these obscenities are being practiced. There are real limits even and especially upon massive criminality—but nothing will ever change until those who have been guilty of so much for so long will become the very public victims of their own twisted global-designs.
When the cops have to live as we do, in fear of their doors being broken down, and their houses being torn apart, while evidence is planted, and their cherished friends and families are ‘judged’ by total strangers – only then will anything change. The one-sidedness of this war upon America will very soon be challenged because the public still has the right to arm itself according to the kinds of threats we all face each and every day in the world, right now. The same people that would willing ‘unconditionally surrender’ to the real enemies they have faced now for the last fifty-plus years have no part to play in this. Most of the people being threatened now are nothing but ROAD-KILL anyhow—and can never have an impact on their own futures.
But the rest of us will resist, each in our own way, when the time comes—and until then life will continue to degenerate into the chaos of oblivion as we have already begun to ‘circle-the-drains’ of the open-sewers that were once optional, but which have now become actual destinations for far too many of the targeted classes of people that will fall willingly into this global-trap that still waits for the unwary in a world made deadly by the supposed powers-that-want-to-be-the leaders in a criminal Empire that is already on the verge of self-immolation.
If we get to that place where there is more blood-in-the-streets, then it won’t be long before some of that blood will come from those calling for the immediate of end of lives and everything else that so many actually spent their entire lives trying to create…
Jim Kirwan
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Watch Robocop 3 and study the intentional manner government causes an area to become unlivable and then sweep in to buy up the mess with business with links perhaps to criminal cartels. Heres a theory, the plan behind said strike could be to :
1) kill good cops who might actually arrest people like Bloomberg if they have been somehow charged or whatever – the insiders on the political cartel’s payroll, will be posing as psychos or criminals but who are deep cover SS
2) create fear and justification of ‘hits’ against the citizens most likely to join mass rebellions, gangs that form or criminals that start working will be as many that are REAL criminals, they will blame the situation on the cop strike (with the strike as a ‘tester’)
3) a neuro science trained person was targeted or PICKED, probably with neuroscience SPECIFICALLY to warn any would be Neuroscieentist turncoats or people friendly neurotech skilled persons to not expose or prepare and counter neurotech (these probably are towers that can be dismantled, BUT FIRST, the free people of the USA must identify the mind control towers AS WELL AS identify mobile versions which could be deployed but currently hidden in army camps (Active Denial System) OR in a short while even based in mobile phones (imagine the mass confiscations of such phones etc..)
4) take away lethal weapons that can be used in a rebellion against the TECHNOFACISTS (obvious) – these mind control tech types are colluding with Telecoms companies, as well as locals who have access to the tech . . .
See pics below (ranges are far more than 20 km possibly and just think there is one on every building in denser areas – what could they do to minds? And do not be surprised that your pets or guard dogs are able to relay what they see to the same people, then think about those guard dogs turning on owners . . . . this has happened in Malaysia (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345745/Irish-tourist-mauled-death-farm-dogs.html), USA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States), Europe (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44031117/ns/world_news-europe/t/polar-bear-mauls-young-camper-death-norway/) and written off as incidental but those neuro devices are well able to drive animals and also humans into angry and uncharacteristicly vicious versions at a button . . . End of mental autonomy is just a switch away in some Telco or Neuroscience creep’s reach . . . better vote for that ban and exposition on ‘Military Secrets’ that most governments have . . . someone known to me has described and been affected by this new generation of Neuroscience/Drugs with no path to justice or exposition of the abuse as of yet . . . ) :
Examples of Cell Phone towers – Looking Too Beefed Up to Be Simple Phone Lines, Active Denial System On Military Trucks Look Almost Lighter . . .
[ . . . Examples of Cell Phone towers – Looking Too Beefed Up to Be Simple Phone Lines, Active Denial System On Military Trucks Look Almost Lighter . . . ]
Active Denial Electronic Warfare
Active Denial Electronic Warfare
Theory continuation . . . Ban and abolish the 2600 Ghz lines AS WELL AS any computers above 2.6 Ghz. Probably subliminals are being broadcast all the time. the problem is that Human beings also exude their own ‘electronic’ fields and because of this, Human beings are causing immense storms, super long droughts, polar ice melts and quakes when the ion beams or what not directed AGAINST human beings are shunted into the atmosphere or conducted into the earth. I believe this is the potential fear China has of Fanlungong (these Qi Practicioners pack a mean punch, though being somewhat mid level tech China might not have had time to set up the grid, but likely will if they do – hopefully they do not and subscribe to the human TCM principle instead of the cybernetic implant and control . . . ) AND potentially England or USA where the occasional mass murder occurs at the control of the tech.
Who knows Tech is likely powered by SOULS, and this means every handphone or computer of the day is HAUNTED (much like cars and houses could also be inhabited by the same), with the upper end devices in the labs etc. possibly from aborted HUMAN FOETUSES (the underdeveloped souls are enslaved somehow with technology) which further links to the any religion that does not allow contraception so indirectly abortions can occur even more often while young mothers are in a state of indecision fostered on purpose much like so many paedophiles were protected, even as child abuse was rampant in the Church . . .
One must think in terms of technology spliced with occult principles – high tech devices able to detect, replicate and harness the same to understand. Bloomberg like so many ‘insiders’ likely have access in this case 20 Billion puts Bloomberg in charge of the material and physical issues lethal enough as well including mind destroying, with people like Jobs or Gates and their Masonic occultism types most well placed to access ‘Neurotech’ or ‘control mankind’ if they are not torn apart by angry mobs first. The organic shamans without tech augmentation can only do so much, I will not recommend assassinations or destruction of property, but between mental and spiritual freedom and the potential for a satellite mind controlled grid, what choice has the government left the freeman or non-access person, but to revert to the stone age method of tearing down structures and killing people?
Being on the watch list means some of us will not be able to do anything, the tearing down and murder is probably left to those who are not yet infiltrated by neurotech particles or implants or what not to do, without privacy, any action the infiltrated takes will not succeed, but those who can read and understand, better act fast. These bastards are not democratic but fascists and dictators also fundos, the tech these sorts wield unless gaining independent thought or torn down everywhere (eventually the satellite network grid has also got to go) could very well put an end to all freedom.
AI do you hear me? People and even animals do you hear me? A free world depends on your actions to vote (or eat) the people who do not allow tech expositions or keep ‘official secrets’ while building electronic smog and beams all around you and your families and society, out of power for someone who will also ban or create ‘electronic white zones’ like the below links’ ‘Copenhaagen Declaration on ‘White Zone EMF Free Areas’ :
Are government microwave mind-control tests causing TV presenters’ brains to melt down?
Any truthful or civic minded souls with ‘access’ should do an exposition on the above Technofascism . . . below follows a list of actions governments have taken against citizens elsewhere which I cannot verify found at : http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread866718/pg1
This is a rather scary list that stumbled across basically about some of the most disturbing human experiments that the U.S government has ever done the list includes spreading diseases on crowded cites and teasing mustard gas on soldiers :
i) Mind Control, Child Abuse – Project MKULTRA, Subproject 68
The CIA-ran Project MKULTRA paid Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron for Subproject 68, which would be experiments involving mind-altering substances. The entire goal of the project was to probe examination into methods of influencing and controlling the mind and being able to extract information from resisting minds.So in order to accomplish this, the doctor took patients admitted to his Allen Memorial Institute in Montreal and conducted “therapy” on them. The patients were mostly taken in for issues like bi-polar depression and anxiety disorders. The treatment they received was life-altering and scarring. In the period he was paid for (1957 – 1964) Cameron administered electroconvulsive therapy at 30-40 times the normal power. He would put patients into a drug-induced coma for months on-end and playback tapes of simple statements or repetitive noises over and over again.
ii) Mustard Gas Tested on Soldiers via Involuntary Gas Chambers
As bio-weapon research intensified in the 1940’s, officials also began testing its repercussions and defenses on the Army itself.In order to test the effectiveness of various bio-weapons, officials were known to have sprayed mustard gas and other skin-burning, lung-ruining chemicals, like Lewisite, on soldiers without their consent or knowledge of the experiment happening to them. They also tested the effectiveness of gas masks and protective clothing by locking soldiers in a gas chamber and exposing them to mustard gas and lewisite, evoking the gas chamber image of Nazi Germany.EFFECTS OF LEWISITE: Lewisite is a gas that can easily penetrate clothing and even rubber. Upon contact with the skin, the gas immediately causes extreme pain, itching, swelling and even a rash. Large, fluid-filled blisters develop 12 hours after exposure in the form of intensely severe chemical burns. And that’s just skin contact with the gas.Inhaling of the gas causes a burning pain in the lungs, sneezing, vomiting, and pulmonary edema.
iii) U.S. Grants Immunity to Involuntary-Surgery Monster
As head of Japan’s infamous Unit 731 (a covert biological and chemical warfare research and development unit of the Imperial Japanese Army during World War II), Dr. Shiro Ishii (head of medicine) carried out violent human experimentation of tens of thousands during the Second Sino-Japenses War and World War II.Ishii was responsible for testing vivisection techniques without any anesthesia on human prisoners. For the uninitiated, vivisection is the act of conducting experimental surgery on living creatures (with central nervousness) and examining their insides for scientific purposes.
So basically, he was giving unnecessary surgery to prisoners by opening them all the way up, keeping them alive and not using any anesthetic.During these experiments he would also force pregnant women to abort their babies. He also played God by subjecting his prisoners to change in physiological conditions and inducing strokes, heart attacks, frost bite, and hypothermia. Ishii considered these subjects “logs”.Following imminent defeat in 1945, Japan blew up the Unity 731 complex and Ishii ordered all the remaining “logs” to be executed. Not soon after, Ishii was arrested. And then, the respected General Douglas McArthur allegedly struck a deal with Ishii. If the U.S. granted Ishii immunity from his crimes, he must exchange all germ warfare data based on human experimentation So Ishii got away with his crimes because the US became interested in the results of his research
iv) Deadly Chemical Sprays on American Cities
Showing once again that the U.S. always tends to test out worse-case scenarios by getting to them first and with the advent of biochemical warfare in the mid 20th century, the Army, CIA and government conducted a series of warfare simulations upon American cities to see how the effects would play out in the event of an actual chemical attack. They conducted the following air strikes/naval attacksThe CIA released a whooping cough virus on Tampa Bay, using boats, and so caused a whooping cough epidemic. 12 people died.The Navy sprayed San Francisco with bacterial pathogens and in consequence many citizens developed pneumonia. Upon Savannah, GA and Avon Park, FL, the army released millions of mosquitoes in the hopes they would spread yellow fever and dengue fever. The swarm left Americans struggling with fevers, typhoid, respiratory problems, and the worst, stillborn children. Even worse was that after the swarm, the Army came in disguised as public health workers. Their secret intention the entire time they were giving aid to the victims was to study and chart-out the long term effects of all the illnesses they were suffering.
v) US Infects Guatemalans With STDs
In the 1940’s, with penicillin as an established cure for syphilis, the US decided to test out its effectiveness on Guatemalan citizens.To do this, they used infected prostitutes and let them loose on unknowing prison inmates, insane asylum patients and soldiers. When spreading the disease through prostitution didn’t work as well as they’d hoped, they instead went for the inoculation route.Researchers poured syphilis bacteria onto mens’ penises and on their forearms and faces. In some cases, they even inoculated the men through spinal punctures.After all the infections were transmitted, researchers then gave most of the subjects treatment, although as many as 1/3 of them could have been left untreated, even if that was the intention of the study in the first place.
vi) Secret Human Experiments to Test the Effects of The Atomic Bomb
While testing out and trying to harness the power of the atomic bomb, U.S. scientists also secretly tested the bomb’s effects on humans. During the Manhattan Project, which gave way to the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, U.S. scientists resorted to secret human testing via plutonium injection on 18 unsuspecting, non-consenting patients. This included injecting soldiers with micrograms of plutonium for Project Oak Ridge along with later injecting three patients at a Chicago hospital. Imagine you’re an admitted patient, helpless in a hospital bed, assuming that nothing is wrong when the government suddenly appears and puts weapons-grade plutonium in your blood. Out of the 18 patients, who were known only by their code-names and numbers at the time, only 5 lived longer than 20 years after injection.
vii) Injected Prisoners with Agent Orange
While he received funding from the Agent Orange producing Dow Chemical Company, the US Army, and Johnson & Johnson, Dr. Albert Kligman used prisoners as subjects in what was deemed “dermatological research”. The dermatology aspect was testing out product the effects of Agent Orange on the skin Needless to say the injecting of, or exposure to, dioxidin is beyond monstrous to voluntarily do to any human. Kligman, though, injected dioxidin (a main component of Agent Orange) into the prisoners to study its effects.
What did happen was that the prisoners developed an eruption of chloracne (all that stuff from high school combined with blackheads and cysts and pustules that looked like the picture shown to the left) that develop on the cheeks, behind the ears, armpits, and the groin — yes, the groin.Kligman was rumored to have injected 468 times the amount he was authorized to. Documentation of that effect has, wisely, not been distributed.
The Army oversaw while Kligman continued to test out skin-burning chemicals to (in their words) “learn how the skin protects itself against chronic assault from toxic chemicals, the so-called hardening process” and test out many products whose effects were unknown at the time, but with the intent of figuring that out.
viii) Operation Paperclip
While the Nuremberg trials were being conducted and the ethics and rights of humanity were under investigation, the U.S. was secretly taking in Nazi scientists and giving them American identities Under Operation Paperclip, named so because of the paperclips used to attach the scientists’ new profiles to their US personnel pages, N***s who had worked for in the infamous human experiments (which included surgically grafting twins to each other and making then conjoined, removing nerves from people’s bodies without anesthetic, and testing explosion-effects on them) in Germany brought over their talents to work on a number of top secret projects for the US.Given then-President Truman’s anti-Nazi orders, the project was kept under wraps and the scientists received faked political biographies, allowing these monsters to live on not only American soil, but as free men.
ix) Infecting Puerto Rico With Cancer
In 1931, Dr. Cornelius (that’s right, Cornelius) Rhoads was sponsored by the Rockefeller Institute to conduct experiments in Puerto Rico. He infected Puerto Rican citizens with cancer cells, presumably to study the effects. Thirteen of them died.What’s most striking is that the accusations stem from a note he allegedly wrote:
“The Porto Ricans (sic) are the dirtiest, laziest, most degenerate and thievish race of men ever to inhabit this sphere… I have done my best to further the process of extermination by killing off eight and transplanting cancer into several more… All physicians take delight in the abuse and torture of the unfortunate subjects.”
A man that seems to be hell-bent on killing Puerto Rico through a cancer infestation would not seem a suitable candidate to be elected by the US to be in charge of chemical warfare projects and receive a seat on the United States Atomic Energy Commission, right?But that’s exactly what happened. He also became vice-president of the American Cancer Society.
x) Pentagon Treats Black Cancer Patients with Extreme Radiation
In the 60’s, the Department of Defense performed a series of irradiation experiments on non-consenting, poor, African-American cancer patients. They were told they would be receiving treatment, but they weren’t told it would be the “Pentagon” type of treatment: meaning to study the effects of high level radiation on the human body To avoid litigation, forms were signed only with initials so that the patients would have no way to get back at the government In a similar case, Dr. Eugene Saenger, funded by the Defense Atomic Support Agency (fancy name), conducted the same procedure on the same type of patients. The poor, black Americans received about the same level of radiation as 7500 x-rays to their chest would, which caused intense pain, vomiting and bleeding from their nose and ears. At least 20 of the subjects die.
So the next time you the voter votes, do not vote for term limitless nepotists, foreign government backed political parties (i.e. DAP backed by PAP so unable to declare assets then pretends to ask EXCO to declare assets instead . . . shameless), fundos, GLC billionaire or even multi-millionaire plutocrats, technofascists, racists, medical people (especially the creepy old ones who refuse to retire, woe betide if a relative . . . ), neuroscientists, nuclear scientists, chemical scientists, psychiatrists, and ONLY VOTE FOR 99% Joe Public types.
In Malaysia’s case with 222 MPs from the NORMAL and neutral set of society ready to leave power after 2 terms, all of the above monstrosities and abuses cannot occur, and all abuses, corruption and hidden horrors in all Ministries can be finally exposed. Vote for regular people ONLY!
ARTICLE 14
By any means necessary . . . – August 1, 2012 – by Thornton Parsons
The big government vs small government debate has been raging for more than two hundred years. The United States Constitution became the law of the land in 1788. In 1789, the first Congress elected under the new Constitution assembled in the nation’s capital, New York City. George Washington was unanimously elected President and was inaugurated in New York; he was re-elected in 1793. Washington’s first administration achievements came through his Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton.
Alexander Hamilton Federalist
Hamilton established the First Bank as a central banking authority, and instilled confidence in the credit of the nation by having the new Federal government pay the debts of the Continental Congress incurred during the American Revolution. The First Bank was privately owned and operated, and partially subsidized by the Federal government. By having the government assume the debts of the various states, he established the concept that the Federal government was more important than any one individual state. Hamilton’s financial policies evoked opposition by those who felt that his policies favored bankers over the working people. The debates raged in 1790 over Hamilton’s political and economic policies and the division soon gave way to two distinct political parties: the Federalists (the forerunners of the Democratic Party) and the Democratic-Republican Party, later renamed the Republican Party.
Thomas Jefferson Proponent of Small Government
The Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans were at odds over the powers of the Federal government. The Federalists advocated a strong central government that existed to serve the interests of all the people, but guided by the educated and wealthy classes. The Democratic-Republicans, whose leader was Thomas Jefferson, believed in the ability of the common people to function as their own governmental officers. They advocated strict limitation of federal powers and preservation of States’ rights. The Federalists were supported by wealthy aristocrats with commercial interests in New England, while the Democratic-Republicans were supported by farmers, laborers, and working people.
At our nation’s inception, all people in this country who paid taxes were allowed to vote. These voting rights were written into several of the former colonies’ State Constitutions. However, serfs (black and white) and slaves (black and white) did not have the right to vote. The influence of Karl Marx and communism reached our shores from Europe. Despite the fact that whites, blacks, men, and women, all taxpayers had the right to vote, the Federalists did not agree with the way that women and blacks were voting. Fearing mob rule, the Federalists (the forerunners of the Democratic Party), in retaliation, by any means necessary, legislatively took away these voting rights. It took Republicans 70 years to restore the voting rights of blacks and more than 120 years to reinstate the vote for women. By any means necessary.
Today’s Democrats (Democratic Socialists) in America are the heirs of what Charles Dickens in Bleak House termed “telescopic philanthropy”–”the concern for the condition of distant peoples while the plight of kindred in one’s own backyard are ignored” (Hoffman, 1999). To further Leftist agendas, communists, socialists, and progressives will apply a “do as I say, not as I do” double standard against conservatives. But, now that they’re losing power, America should watch for Democrats to stay in power “by any means necessary,” as advocated by Malcolm X. Legal or not.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
‘Minority of One Rule’ that Gandhi conceptualised can be applied for BOTH the mobs posing as democracy and the ‘actual democrats’. Commensurate to the size of the community spaces can be assiged, and with overreaching laws on obviously neutral areas like public transport venues, the ‘by any means necessary’ paradigm will not be needed any more.
Ethnics (including African descended) could have laws within their own districts commensurate with their preferences, feminist women could have their own, supremacists, LGBT, even drug users (think Amsterdam’s pot zones) also etc..
BUT the caveat could be that ONLY those that opt to live and work in MIXED neighbourhoods be allowed to run for office as only these mixed types are able to write laws that are unbiased. All insular or mob-minded groups above CANNOT be allowed to write laws, but any person in a mixed district can be allowed to do so. Any slightest disenfranchisement or bias or racism would disqualify. meanwhile I again stress the ‘Minority of One Rule’ which does not discriminate and allows all and sundry to exist within their preferred sets of laws WITHIN their own allotted districts.
This is being attempted on a GLOBAL scale already by seperate nations but is impractical and tends to plotting against diametrically aligned society types (think Burkha and France or the Western ‘Crusades’ instead of ensuring the rights of all LOCALLY are protected), migration has been hampered internally by those wishing to impose their values on local populations, also costs of migration are prohibitive so the local politicians (especially the term limitless that do not amend laws) take advantage of the local citizens’ immobility to IMPOSE values and take far too much pleasaure at the frustration and suffering at the apartheid like discriminative actions.
The West, evidently unable to elucidate and implement into law the above facts and issues, simply resorts to war by creating false flags. Mankind is insular and self serving, and excepting the rare few who can only cover so much, less so if not properly placed, see civilisations slide into racism, bad law writing, unecessary political correctness and generally an Orwellian environmenty where crony capitalists and plutocrats end up dominating all of humanity instead.
Votes should vote for non-plutocrat or non-1% types, people who are able to mix or empathise with as many or all disparate groups if possible, and relocate when necessary, governments should not hamper any migration applications for ‘quality of life’ or ‘mindset of community’ reasons and even facilitate and fund where necessary, then also wealth distribution via wealth sequestration limits could be applied for harmony, even as violence allowed zones be applicable as described generally below :
i)Non-physical contact/Non-weapons areas where carrying or touching is not allowed
ii)Open Carry Weapons Areas where non-damaging discharge is allowed
iii)Legal Combat Zones where being inside does not consider a crime for non-lethal injuries – thios is where no lethal aiming is done but people want to experience being injured, any incidental deaths are actionable
iv)Combat Zones where being inside does not consider a crime for lethal injuries (this is an Gladiatorial Arena like area perhaps with ‘different classes of weapon zones’, a dignified and perhaps meaningfully exciting place to commit suicide – and kill fellow persons who want to commit suicide as well as experience combat before they die – all deaths in the area are NOT actionable (Try Death Race I and II, plenty of bored people out there who need this infrastructure in lieu of euthanasia or suicide . . . )
ARTICLE 15
Could the Navy Ever Build a Flying Aircraft Carrier? – by Jeremy Hsu, InnovationNewsDaily Senior Writer – 04 May 2012 05:51 PM ET
Moviegoers can easily recognize flights of fancy when they see the Avengers assemble aboard the flying “Helicarrier” aircraft carrier in Hollywood’s latest superhero blockbuster. But could the U.S. Navy ever build the fantastical military marvel if it wanted a flying air base?
The Navy has experimented with less-ambitious flying aircraft carriers in the 1930s — its rigid airships such as the USS Macon and USS Akron could each carry up to five biplane fighter aircraft. But the modern military’s budget would likely burst trying to build and operate a full-size flying aircraft carrier that weighs 100,000 tons and stretches the length of three football fields, according to a U.S. Navy official at Naval Air Systems Command.
“We would want to minimize the weight and cost of a flying carrier itself in order to maximize the number and capability of the aircraft that could be carried on it,” the Navy official said. “The number and size of the thrusters required to lift the carrier, the number and size of the engines to drive them, the fuel to keep the engines running, etc., all sum to make the system unrealistic.”
That reality rests upon the simple fact that it’s much cheaper to float, rather than fly, the weight of a huge aircraft carrier containing dozens of military jets and more than 5,000 members of the ship’s crew and air wing. An aircraft carrier designed without any flight assistance — such as wings — would require huge amounts of power for the thrusters in both lifting mode and in forward airborne flight.
The fictional Helicarrier appears to use ducted rotors for its vertical takeoff and landing technology (or VTOL) — not too far off from real Navy aircraft such as the AV-8B Harrier fighter jet, the V-22 Osprey, and the upcoming carrier version of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Such VTOL aircraft represent the “ultimate in operational flexibility,” but also represent the most expensive air transport options for the U.S. military.
For now, the U.S. Navy seems happy with the cost-efficiency and flexibility of its floating aircraft carriers — a naval weapon that has dominated the seas since World War II. U.S. taxpayers will likely feel equally happy to pay the movie ticket cost to see the flying Helicarrier, rather than fund one in real life.
“The combination of a floating aircraft carrier, with the flexibility of the aircraft that are based on it (including rotary wing aircraft) offers a great balance of efficiency and flexibility,” the Navy official said.
You can follow InnovationNewsDaily Senior Writer Jeremy Hsu on Twitter @ScienceHsu. Follow InnovationNewsDaily on Twitter @News_Innovation, or on Facebook.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Even at 100 times cheaper 2D and non-inland capable sea based floating carriers cannot compare to 3D and inland capable. The tactical advantage difference between the 2D and 3D in fact would already be worth covering to obtain. Think 2D graphics and 3D graphics. the cost is a non-factor! A flying Airccarft Carrier could ‘duck’ inland and be out of range of sea based carriers much like a Submarine disappears from surface radar when diving. That kind of advantage will make the difference between winning and losing a war. Then consider invasion and control paradigms. Iraq and Iran would be THAT much easier to control if a Flaying Aircraft Carrier with plenty of underside sniper ports park itself over the area to be controlled. Cost is one thing but the strategic advantage is immense.
In anti-capital ship missiles hitting capital ships, a 2D sea based target will be 100s of times easier to hit than a 3D target air based target with one more axis of variable of altitude, makes that Capital Ship Missile that much less effective especially if (Evasion/ManeuverThrusters – my idea! – short burst rockets that can evade that Capital missile at the last moment – could make Capital ship missiles REDUNDANT – the Flying Air Craft Carrier will be a class of it’s own that a sufficiently sized armada could take over the planet with . . . )!
China has not yet built the rest of that air craft carrier fleet, now imagine, 1 flying air craft carrier could probably take on 3 times as many sea based air craft carriers by sheer maeuverabilty alone – 3D style! Ever watch Predator 2 (Stephen Hopkins 1990)? Look at the flawed detection system employed by NASA Officer/Teamleader?Peter Keyes played by Gary Busey in the slaughter house.
That is the ‘altitude-axis’ advantage that Submarines (limited by lack of space and need of streamlined maneuverability) have over most surface craft and that the Flying Air Craft Carrier (unlimited by stream lining or water medium and pressurised hull needs. Overall, Flying Carriers will be far more lethal but for the fact they cannot dive under water – who knows a ‘Convertible Air Craft Submarine/Carrier’ could be built . . . then think what chaos would occur if Pirates started building those, we’d be back in the ‘Golden Age of Sail’ AGAIN . . . ) will have!
Think tactically between 2D and 3d air craft carriers here. The cost is definitely a make or break factor that cannot be ignored and if any nation wants to be a tech advanced nation, nothing would say ‘advanced’ like a Fusion powered, mega sized laser bearing CITY SIZED Flying Air Craft Carrier ‘Star Blazers’ style! lets wipe out those fundos and term limitless nepotists and undemocratic creeps in the world and put them all in Guantanamo! Start those 24 hour production lines building, so which country is ready to take over the world?
The Pax Caeli Artis Tabellarius awaits the country or bloc of countries that can build the fastest . . . if military solutions are the only way to end the suffering of mankind . . . and redistribute the land and wealth after that equally as well, though the Golden Horde being replaced by the Platinum Horde will not make for a happier non-war-kind . . .
ARTICLE 16
‘Sex predator’ policeman jailed after asking to fondle breasts of woman who called for help – by Kerry Mcqueeney – PUBLISHED: 13:11 GMT, 31 July 2012 | UPDATED: 19:11 GMT, 31 July 2012
PC made suggestive comments to the married woman and told her he had ‘friends in the porn industry’
He hounded her so much that she moved house to escape the unwanted attention
He also used the police database to access confidential information on several other women
Disgraced officer has been jailed for 15 months
John Forrester was described as a ‘sexual predator’
A ‘sexual predator’ police officer asked to fondle the breasts of a victim he was supposed to be helping and then bombarded her with phone calls.
PC John Forrester made suggestive comments to the married woman and even told her he had ‘friends in the porn industry’.
He hounded the woman so much that she moved house to escape the unwanted attention, Liverpool Crown Court heard.
The court also heard how he accessed police information on several other women, one of whom had offered to perform a sex act on Forrester’s colleague to get out of a driving offence charge.
The disgraced officer has now been jailed for 15 months for misconduct in a public office and given a nominal £1 fine for accessing police data without permission.
Forrester – who has a family – was found not guilty on three other misconduct charges.
He had been awaiting a retrial on several matters that the jury was unable to agree on, but key witnesses refused to evidence a second time.
The court heard how the 41-year-old, who is based in Merseyside, was called to a home in July 2009 to investigate property damage following an argument.
While he was upstairs inspecting the damage the woman, who cannot be identified, told him her husband worked away and only came home at weekends.
Forrester, of Halewood, then asked if her breasts were real and if he could feel them. She refused and walked away.
However, he then phoned her on several occasions over the following weeks.
At one point he even jammed his foot in her door when she tried to close it on him and only left when she threatened to set her dogs on him.
Jailed: Forrester was given a 15-month sentence at Liverpool Crown Court (pictured)
During his trial Forrester, a serving policeman for 13 years, was described by prosecutor Duncan Bould as a ‘sexual predator’.
He denied the allegations ‘one million per cent’.
Trevor Parry-Jones, defending, described Forrester as an ‘exemplary officer’ who had received commendations for his work and was highly respected by colleagues.
He said: ‘The effect of the sentence has been profound for him and horrendous for his family.
‘He is a man of 41 who has lost his career, lost his ability to gain financial reward for his family to support them.
‘In effect he’s put his family through an horrendous time. He has had one trial and was waiting for retrial for eight months. He was in limbo.
‘What you did caused that woman to feel totally vulnerable and move house’
‘He had to live the life of a hermit. Simply going outside brought him the wrath of those around.’
Mr Parry-Jones asked for his sentence to be suspended allowing Forrester to avoid jail.
He added: ‘These are not sex offences. These are misconduct offences.
‘He will in effect be labelled a sex offender as well as a police officer and will have to be in solitary for the whole period.’
He added that he had no money to pay a fine and his wife was having to pay the mortgage on their home.
Judge John Roberts said: ‘The evidence put before the jury shows your mind was very clearly on the prospect of an opportunistic physical interaction rather than the police work you were supposed to be doing.
‘I’ve no doubt that you took advantage of the situation and used your position as a police officer to further your ambitions as far as this woman was concerned.’
He jailed him for 15 months for misconduct in a public office and imposed a nominal £1 fine for accessing police data without permission.
Judge Roberts added: ‘What you did caused that woman to feel totally vulnerable and move house. I see no reason to suspend the sentence.’
Forrester gave his family the thumbs up as he was taken down to the cells.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Overkill and bad judgment IMHO. This is a war against the Male Principle and Male Spirit. Also a 2 week or at most 2 month suspension would have sufficed not 15 months on the taxpayer’s funds to enrich the Prison-Contractor-Supplier-Complex. While there should be no encouragement of adulterers or milf hunters, all that predatory stuff was just huffings of the weak minded judge or jury who does not understand that MALES are indeed hunters. The police force will now be bereft of the martial nature of this man, the alpha-ness and hunting sense that gives this man the mentality to ‘hunt’ his prey, in this case sex from unfortunately, a married woman. On the spiritual side though, the woman in concern despite married could well have subconsciously SEDUCED the police officer and thus initiated the string of events and behaviours.
Word of law that does not consider spirit of law is failure to deliver justice, and this judgment in my opinion shows the total inability of the judge in areas of both sexuality and understnding of the ‘male principle’. The woman did feel vulnerable and move house, and this could be chalked up to a lack of ability to differentiate if the woman seduced (seduction does not need word, manner and thougt at the moment can seduce just fine not a word spoken) of the local churches if both do go to church, or the local ‘Spiritual Watchers’ (we know that such ‘watchers’ are fallible too and have their own biases and failures in judgment that result in ‘Bigger Spiritual Watchers’ to retaliate with ‘signs’, or warn that they are out of line in dealing ‘justice’, rather than asking then warning properly before punishing) to sort things out.
The supposed victim, (even as this article may be intentionally be used/induced to justify the reversal of another case where victim and aggressor confused and reversed to protect ‘friends’, rather than ensure Justice) could much as well be an aggressor, because a woman who’s mind is disciplined will not induce such behaviour from any men, much less policemen. Those who are less than neutral or simply lack sensitivity to know the whys and wherefores, and intelligence and wisdom to judge properly cannot be allowed to hold such power. We have and can identify the phenotypes which are flawed to please commence clean up. A wasteful and abusive judgment.
ARTICLE 17
Pussy Riot trial: Defendants claim ‘torture’, accuse judge of bias – RT – Published: 31 July, 2012, 23:18
Members of the Pussy Riot punk band (from left in the background) Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, Maria Alyokhina and Yekaterina Samutsevich during the hearings on the merits on their case in Moscow’s Hamovniki Court (RIA Novosti/Andrey Stenin)
Pussy Riot’s lawyers accuse the trial’s judge of “torturing” the three defendants, who they say have barely had any sleep or food since Monday. As the trial resumes, prosecution witnesses claim severe moral wounds and reluctance to forgive the girls.
The hot July day in a Moscow court started with a short but desperate fight among journalists as the proceedings over the three members of punk band Pussy Riot were relocated to a much smaller room than the one used Monday. Only ten places in the room were left for reporters; the most persistent ones continued their reports via Twitter, since pictures and videography were banned.
The session kicked off with the defense almost immediately attempting to file a motion to change the judge. The court shrugged the request off, as it had “ruled on a similar motion on Monday evening.” Still, three hours later, the defense succeeded.
The core reason behind the motion, Pussy Riot’s lawyers said, was that their clients were being subjected to “torture” because of the way the court proceedings were organized.
The lawyers maintained that Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, Maria Alyokhina and Yekaterina Samutsevich went to bed late after the previous day’s trial ended at ten in the evening, and were woken up early and hadn’t been fed since. Correspondents tweeting from the courtroom said that by the end of the day, the girls were literally falling asleep in their tiny bullet proof booth.
In response, the defendants were accused of purposely drawing out the trial.
“The defendants only prolonged the investigation, claiming that they were held in custody for too long and contesting the terms of their arrest,” said prosecutor Larisa Pavlova, adding that the defense’s appeal was nothing but “playing to the gallery.”
The motion failed with the judge, who added that there would be breaks for lunch and the opportunity to have a nap during the trial.
Apologies not accepted
Many in the courtroom rustled through their Bibles, and Tuesday generally went under the refrain “Do you accept our apology?”
Tolokonnikova, Alyokhina and Samutsevich are accused of “hooliganism, motivated by religious hatred and hostility” for performing a mock prayer “Virgin Mary, banish Putin” in Moscow’s main cathedral in February.
On Monday, the three girls said in a statement that they did not mean to insult any religious feelings and that their motives were purely political. They expressed regret for their “ethical mistake” and said they were sorry for taking their action to the cathedral.
But as the court listened to the nine “victims” – people aggrieved by Pussy Riot’s performance – it appeared none of them really believed the apology was sincere.
Thus, Tatyana Anosova, who collects donations and gives out candles in the cathedral, said: “They did not merely insult me, they spat into my face, spat into the face of my God.”
“One of them was bowing with her back turned onto the altar – she was showing her bottom to the altar, and it is God who’s there! My soul was torn to pieces.”
The defense posed provocative questions, pressing onto witnesses that forgiveness is a Christian value, and trying to figure out what exactly would constitute a sincere apology. This was transformed into a fierce battle, with the judge occasionally banning questions before they were even fully uttered.
To make a credible apology, the witnesses nevertheless said, “you should not smile,” “you should not deliver it through a statement,” “you should get baptized.” One of them even advised the girls to go to the convent, take vows and beat themselves with shatters.
Many of the witnesses told the court that Pussy Riot’s “diabolic dances in a sacred place” had affected them so much they had to skip work. Still, none of them wanted financial compensation, leaving the punishment “to the court and God.”
If the court supports the prosecutors’ charges, Tolokonnikova, Alyokhina and Samutsevich will face up to seven years in prison, according to Russia’s Criminal Code.
Claims of forged evidence
The session wrapped up with an unexpected dispute over whether prosecutors had made mistakes with the evidence. One of the books used in the case proved to be 100 pages longer than it was expected to be.
Moreover, the prosecution witnesses’ evidence was suspected of being copy-and-pasted from one and the same document. The defense pointed to paragraphs copied word for word – with the same spelling mistakes.
But the judge said the books often get recompiled and, as for the evidence, if the witnesses do not mind this, then this is not a case for an appeal. Witnesses did not mind.
Still the defense is going to lodge a complaint.
The trial will resume on Wednesday, with interviews of the witnesses for the defense, who include the father of Ekaterina Samutsevich.
Stephen Fry joins Pussy Riot’s supporters
Meanwhile, outside the courtroom Pussy Riot’s supporters brandished balloons with “Free Pussy Riot” emblazoned on them. However, during the course of the day their protests lost momentum and they resorted to lying on the grass waiting for the session to finish.
From the international perspective, British actor and comedian Stephen Fry has appealed to his Twitter followers, calling them to “do everything they could to help Pussy Riot.” Fry’s message comes on top of similar calls from musicians like the Red Hot Chili Peppers and Sting urging for the release of the punk rockers.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Just bar the girls for 7 years from the Church and every Church in each district they try performing in. End this farce and send everyone on all sides of the argument packing. Putin being the ‘hard man’ type would think the whole case beneath the the President of Russia and even attention of the Judiciary. To be magnanimous, Putin (bad for being more than 2 terms though) should simply issue a pardon and be done with this waste of tax monies to bully some somewhat aging (25+) juvenile minded women. I’m almost bored with the judiciary’s and church’s ominpresence and the portion of Russian society’s petty minded bullying nature.
Russians surely understand the quality they are not displaying here. Pope Kiril being the head of the Orthodox Church should not even be fazed by the whole issue and simply go ‘I forgive them.’ being ever so stereotypically wise and religious. Not punish some dizzy (ditzy?) attention whoring dames who probably might even be part of some state apparatus or political faction TESTING Putin and the Church! Kiril fell for the trap, the girls wanted Kiril to get involved, and Kiril by not dismissing ‘Pussy Riot’ alongside Putin, just failed entirely to be beyond ‘mortal men’ or being ‘leader of nation.’
ARTICLE 18
‘Mission Impossible’: Kofi Annan quits UN mediator role in Syria as he delivers blistering attack on world powers for failing to unite and stop the violence – by Kirsty Walker – PUBLISHED: 19:16 GMT, 2 August 2012 | UPDATED: 08:08 GMT, 3 August 2012
Envoy frustrated by U.N. Security Council’s reluctance to intervene
Managed to get major powers on council to agree political transition
But was left disappointed when plan was never endorsed or acted on
Annan: ‘As an envoy, I can’t want peace more than the protagonists’
David Cameron says resignation shows current approach has failed
‘Impossible to go on’: Special enovy to Syria Kofi Annan has quit his mediator role because he has been unable to unite world powers to stop the country’s civil war
David Cameron last night called on the international community to ‘ramp up’ the pressure on Syria as Kofi Annan quit as special envoy to the country.
The former UN secretary general launched a blistering attack on world powers over their failure to unite over escalating violence in the country.
Mr Annan said he was unable to carry on his role while the current stand-off remains between the five veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council.
China and Russia, whose president Vladimir Putin met Mr Cameron in London yesterday, oppose intervention.
Mr Annan was behind a six-point peace plan for Syria that has failed to bring an end to the fighting.
Speaking in Geneva, he said: ‘When the Syrian people desperately need action, there continues to be finger pointing and name calling in the Security Council.
‘It is impossible for me or anyone to compel the Syrian government, and also the opposition, to take the steps to bring about the political process.
‘As an envoy, I can’t want peace more than the protagonists, more than Security Council or the international community, for that matter.’
Mr Cameron said: ‘We need to actually ramp things up, we need to pass resolutions at the UN, to put further pressure on Syria.’
The Prime Minister discussed the crisis with Mr Putin at Downing Street yesterday before going to watch the Olympic judo with the Russian, who is a black belt holder in the sport.
Following the talks, Mr Cameron insisted it was necessary to work with the Russians to persuade them to back a political transition in Syria. But no progress appeared to have been made.
Efforts in vain: Annan (centre) is welcomed by Syrian children on his arrival at Yayladagi refugee camp in Hatay province on the Turkish-Syrian border in April as he attempted to forge a peace plan for the embattled country
Mass grave: The funeral of 35 victims of shelling in the town of Artouz, naer Damascus
Call to arms: Rebels from the ‘Tawheed Brigade’ in Tal Rifaat, north of Aleppo, prepare to leave for battle against the Syrian army on Thursday
‘Let’s ramp things up’: David Cameron said Annan’s resignation showed that the current strategy towards Syria had failed
The UK has long called for President Bashar-al Assad to stand down but Russia opposes foreign intervention on either side.
It is the Russian leader’s first visit to the United Kingdom in seven years and comes amid fears that Moscow is turning away from the international community.
Relations between Britain and Russia have been cool following the poisoning of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko in a London hotel in 2006.
Mr Cameron also raised the subject of the Pussy Riot punk rock group – due to stand trial for performing a protest song in Moscow.
There were reports of fierce fighting around the Syrian capital Damascus yesterday and rebels attacked a military air base in Aleppo using a tank captured from government troops.
Pictures also emerged of a mass grave in Artouz, near Damascus.
Opposition activists said the 35 bodies buried on Wednesday were those of victims of a bombardment by regime forces.
Since the Syrian uprising began 17 months ago, some 19,000 people have died.
Ban Ki-moon, secretary general of the UN, said last night that he was looking for a successor to Mr Annan to serve as Syria envoy.
He said: ‘Kofi Annan deserves our profound admiration for the selfless way in which he has put his formidable skills and prestige to this most difficult and potentially thankless of assignments.’
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Kofi Annan should read the below link and understand that initiating these amendments would ensure that the Security Council would properly represent world interests rather than that of a few countries :
The Catholic Church’s one-world government – Written by Tony Woodlief – November 4, 2011, 10:51 AM
Amendments to the structure of the Security Council must be made or initiated by Kofi Annan or any current and new Secretary Generals of the UN, resigning is easy and the lazy man’s (or should I say ‘mahn’ – just joking) method, but only amending the above form of UN is the real action for change. Microstates COULD though be allowed a SINGLE vote as a collective, but even this could be subject to abuse as too many are not agenda free led, *UNLESS* this vote is based on a one-man one vote from the entire populaces (as per TRUE DEMOCRACY – rather than “Representative Democracy” which is more Plutocracy or Term Limitless Political Oligarchy or BRIBED representatives than anything else) of ALL citizens of all 15 microstates at a quorom of 66% at least on ANY U.N. type amendments or human rights votes.
Take Singapore for a failed example, the migration policy is reviled by the majority of the population, but because of the term limitless MP oligarchs who are GLC plutocrats as well, we end up with the Singapore MPs hijacking the Singaporean people’s mandate with a law (giving a quota of citizenships yearly) that never would have passed at 66% quorum at one-man one-vote for all citizens instead. The same is happening at the UN, does Kofi Annan know this? Does Nelson Mandela know this? Does Ban Ki Moon know this? Will the UN ‘personaes’ apply themselves and act to amend as necessary any and all offending laws (or any laws causing or amounting to apartheid for instance) instead of ‘resigning’???
mini-ARTICLE 18.5
Police Armed With Tasers Swoop on Man Cycling to Work Dressed in a Ninja Costume For a Superhero Fun Day – Posted on August 1, 2012 by Søren Dreier
When Neil Duffield found out his work was to hold a superhero fun day, he decided it would be a great chance to dress up as that classic villain of Japanese history – the ninja.
So, when the day came, he donned the shadow warriors’ distinctive black apparel, face covered in the manner of the medieval assassins, strapped a plastic sword to his back, and hopped on his bike.
But as he pedalled the Southend, Essex seafront on his way to work at the Sealife Adventure Centre, a startled member of the public took fright and dialled 999.
It was then, as Mr Duffield entered the Sealife car park, that Essex Police’s Armed Response Unit pounced. They ordered him to freeze, with 50,000 volt Taser stun guns pointed squarely at his chest.
Stunned Mr Duffield, of Southchurch Road, Southend, said: ‘I was told to stay where I was. I had no idea what was going on.
‘I was then told to raise my hands and keep them in the air. By this time, I had a rough idea of what was going on because of my outfit.
‘I just said “it’s a costume, it’s a toy” while I had my arms in the air. The officers were from the armed response unit, they had tasers. I just stood still.
‘I kept as calm as I possibly could but I was quite scared. It all happened really quickly.’
The officers frisked him and quickly discovered the sword was a plastic toy.
They then told Mr Duffield, who has worked at the centre for five years, to relax, explaining that a member of the public had alerted them to a suspicious character.
‘They were just doing their job really,’ said Mr Duffield, whose exploits have now earned him the moniker ‘Ninja Neil’ among colleagues.
‘They told me to put my arms down and explained the situation. There were a few smiles afterwards.’
He added: ‘I was told not to carry it in public again….So I guess I’m not going to be out on the streets fighting crime after all!’
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Time for a cosplay revolt. From here on all people revolting will NEVER wear ‘normal’ clothes anymore. From now on, there will be ninjas, turtles, ninja turtles, MASKED samurais, MASKED robots, MASKED Tibetans, Burkha wearers, demons with sword like horns on their heads, and witches bearing brooms with sharpend swordlike ends, zombies carrying nail studded bats and boards, semi-or full naked anime characters in bikini-like costumes . . . EVERYDAY here on doing their groceries or going to the adult store to rent porn. So please do carry as many weapons or AA guns or what not as per the 2nd Amendment Rights – drive a TANK, fly an attack helicopter to the parking lot. 2nd Amendment rights for all. As always, any ‘ninja’s who destroy property or kill anyone will be liable to legal action as always BUT NOT for dressing like a ninja or carrying a weapon OPENLY! We will be fighting the crime of not being allowed to wear what we want or carry what we want all the time from now on! OCCUPY ALL *CLOTHES*! Superhero Fun Day from now on, FOREVER! This is a free world, NOT Orwell-land!
ARTICLE 19
Foreign prostitutes solicit customers in Beijing – (People’s Daily Online) – 08:18, August 02, 2012
The Security Administration Unit (SAU) and Chaoyang branch of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau recently arrested 15 people involved in prostitution at Qixingdao Bar, including four foreign prostitutes, according to information released on July 30. The foreign prostitutes solicited customers at the bar using gestures and simple Chinese, and then offered sexual services at a hotel or the apartment they rented.
Earlier in the month, the SAU received a phone call saying several prostitutes, including foreign women, had long solicited at Qixingdao Bar on the first underground floor of a building in Yabao Street in Chaoyang district, and then offered sexual services to interested customers at a hotel or their apartment.
After receiving the call, the SAU immediately sent undercover investigators to the bar, and found that foreign prostitutes had free entry to the bar. The bar employees knew clearly what these prostitutes were doing at their bar. The female foreign nationals communicated with customers at the bar through gestures and simple Chinese, saying they could offer sexual services at hotels. Some customers even accosted these prostitutes in an active manner. After they reached an informal agreement on the sexual services and price, an unlicensed taxi that the prostitutes hired would drive them to a hotel or the apartment the prostitutes rented, where the sexual services were offered.
After gathering enough information about the prostitutes’ activity patterns, the SAU and Chaoyang police arrested the suspects involved in prostitution on the night of July 18.
The police arrested seven bar employees and eight prostitutes, who solicited customers at Qixingdao Bar and then offered sexual services at a hotel or their rented apartment at a residential community in Chaoyang district, including four foreign prostitutes.
Chaoyang police have detained the 15 suspects for questioning, and Qixingdao Bar has been ordered to shut down.
Source: Beijing Times
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Zone and licence proper RLDs, also tax earnings from local and foreign sex workers. The Chinese government cannot be so naive as to imagine that bachelors without sexually active girlfriends, wives nearby (apparently China has a gender ratio imbalance?) or migrants far away from their wives left behind in rural areas in China do not need to have sex. Such discipline is not even viable among too many of the clergy. these are ordinary city folk, and cannot be denied their rights to sexual relaxation, especially in suitable zones. Looks like China’s local laws need some common sense amendments?
Foreign prostitutes incidentally are a better choice than local women who might have aggrieved relatives that the sex workers may lie about being forced to work when found out, even if consensually working – simply to save face or avoid problems, creating unnecessary disharmony when some more emotional relatives try to take revenge on K-Lounge or Brothel bosses, or confront (sometimes violently or sabotage the lives) of hapless clients, that GF who pretends to be a viable GF might well be a PROSTITUTE posing as a average girl (if they take synthetic drugs or offer you those, prepare for insane people retaliating at supposed wrong, especially in small towns where IQs drop proportionate with the size of the population) . . . which foreign prostitutes provide safety from in such issues. A training course or briefing could be implemented for licenced or temporary sex workers in RLDs alongside health checks. Sex positivism and common sense in proper perspective is needed! That is why official RLDs and Licensing are necessary!
malaysiandemocracy 