civil rights

Episode: 20 Years in Prison for Boycotting a Foreign Government

I wasn’t planning on this episode. But an article over at The Intercept prompted me to drop everything and dive into this story: The US Congress has a bill, with support, to make it a felony to join any movements with the purpose of boycotting Israel. It carries a fine of 250k and up to 20 years in prison. Such a violation of the 1st Amendment.

So in this episode I break down this law, and the influence of the Israeli lobby behind it. I give some backstory of the Israel lobby in this country and how it’s interests are not Americans interest. No matter what DC tells you.

I also follow up on the Turkey-NATO split and the revenge killings in Mosul.

Episode link

Picture source

Content sources:

Revenge Attacks Grow in and Around ‘Liberated’ Mosul

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

AIPAC Still Our Biggest Foreign Agent

US Imperils Nuclear Deal With New Iran Sanctions

Why Isis Fighters Are Being Thrown Off Buildings in Mosul
Netanyahu: Israel Opposes Cease-fire Deal Reached by U.S. and Russia in Southern Syria

Pentagon Furious After Turkey Leaks U.S. Base Locations In Syria

Advertisements

Scholar Suggests Civil Disobedience Against Regulatory State

“I had this image in my mind of a guy in a pin stripe suit appearing out of nowhere,” he recalled, “tapping the bureaucrat on the shoulder, and saying, ‘We are taking this man’s case. He won’t pay a dime for it. We will pursue this case until you are sick of us. We will use all of the legal procedures we can to drag it out. And when at the end you finally fine him for violating this stupid, pointless regulation that he did in fact violate, we will reimburse his fine.’” That made him feel better.

Link

The Constitution’s Pearl Harbor

Justin Raimondo‘s latest on the end of the 4th amendment.

“H.R. 4681 is now the law of the land – and the implications are ominous.

Previous legislation, including the PATRIOT Act, at least attempted to create a halo of “legality” around the Surveillance State by requiring some procedural folderol prior to despoiling the contents of our email in-boxes. That this ritual was to occur in secret, with the “court” 98.9 percent certain to take the government’s side, is beside the point – the point being that all pretenses have been dropped. The idea that the government must answer in court to the charge that it is overstepping its constitutional authority has been overthrown – and with it our old republic. Citizens have become subjects – and all with the stroke of a pen.

That the penumbra of “law” was always a smokescreen for the rapacity inherent in all governments is something us libertarians could have told you – indeed, have been telling you – and yet one can hardly fault the skepticism of both liberals and conservatives. After all, don’t we have a Bill of Rights? Isn’t this still America?

The answer to both questions is no.”

Berkeley Liberals Shut Down Peter Theil Speech

Genius protesters decided to protest against the police state and the NSA during a speech by Paypal founder Peter Thiel. Thiel, a libertarian who supported the champion of civil liberties Ron Paul and founder of a company that bunks the “1%” central bankers by accepting Bitcoin very early on. But, what do closed minded liberals know?

Source

The U.N. Says US State Laws on Legal Marijuana “Not in Line with International Law”

And this is why having unelected, world government bodies is so fucking stupid. Give the U.N. the power to regulate gun laws, climate and the economy and they will also dip their toes in other areas. The more local the ruling state, the more control people have over it.

Source

Britain Plans to Muzzle “Extremist” Speech

I’m sure some of the overly offended on social media will love this idea. They will miss the huge step towards authoritarian it is, because they aren’t for free speech if it offends them or isn’t mainstream. These “progressive liberals” have used the rally cry against “hate speech” to open the door for the state to jump in and propose this piece of shit.

Boy I wish America was more like Britain don’t you?

From Reason:

In Britain, if you have extreme views on anything from Western democracy to women’s role in public life, you might soon require a licence from the government before you can speak in public. Seriously.

It’s the brainchild of Theresa May, the Home Secretary in David Cameron’s government. May wants to introduce “extremism disruption orders”, which, yes, are as terrifyingly authoritarian as they sound.

Last month, May unveiled her ambition to “eliminate extremism in all its forms.” Whether you’re a neo-Nazi or an Islamist, or just someone who says things which betray, in May’s words, a lack of “respect for the rule of law” and “respect for minorities”, then you could be served with an extremism disruption order (EDO).

Strikingly, EDOs will target even individuals who do not espouse or promote violence, which is already a crime in the U.K. As May says, “The problem that we have had is this distinction of saying we will only go after you if you are an extremist that directly supports violence. [This] has left the field open for extremists who know how not to step over the line.” How telling that a leading British politician should be snotty about “this distinction” between speech and violence, between words and actions, which isn’t actually some glitch in the legal system, as she seems to think, but rather is the foundation stone on which every free, democratic society ought to be built.

Once served with an EDO, you will be banned from publishing on the Internet, speaking in a public forum, or appearing on TV. To say something online, including just tweeting or posting on Facebook, you will need the permission of the police. There will be a “requirement to submit to the police in advance any proposed publication on the web, social media or print.” That is, you will effectively need a licence from the state to speak, to publish, even to tweet, just as writers and poets did in the 1600s before the licensing of the press was swept away and modern, enlightened Britain was born (or so we thought).

Behind Closed Doors, Government Officials Make Shocking Comments About Civil Forfeiture

Without even needing to charge someone with a crime, law enforcement can seize and keep cash, cars and even homes, by exercising civil forfeiture. Now the Institute for Justice has uncovered recordings of government officials from across the country making unsettling comments about this controversial power:

• One city attorney called his legal documents a “masterpiece of deception” and has won 96 percent of his forfeiture cases.
• An assistant district attorney takes property, even from owners who have been acquitted, because “people are not found innocent, they are found not guilty.”
• One government official doesn’t want to disclose information about civil forfeiture, because it might become a “bullet-point for people that are trying to fight the program.”
• A prosecutor teaches other attorneys how to take property from innocent people. He even offers this piece of advice, “IF IN DOUBT…TAKE IT!”

Source

Ron Paul On Ferguson

Ferguson: The War Comes Home by Ron Paul

The increasing use of military equipment by local police is a symptom of growing authoritarianism, not the cause. The cause is policies that encourage police to see Americans as enemies to subjugate, rather than as citizens to “protect and serve.” This attitude is on display not only in Ferguson, but in the police lockdown following the Boston Marathon bombing and in the Americans killed and injured in “no-knock” raids conducted by militarized SWAT teams.