It’s Happening in America Too!

[bwsi45]

It’s Happening in America Too

Dear XXXXX,

It was the “tweet” heard ‘round the world.

It’s a sign of the times when people online declare war on freedom oppressors. And as we’ve all learned from watching events in Egypt over the last three weeks, a call to arms in cyberspace is no less effective than in a town square.

The end result is the same - an embattled dictator gave up power after stubborn refusals to leave a position he’s held for three decades.

Some say President Mubarak would still be in charge if not for the power of social networking. Sites like Facebook and Twitter served as critical tools for protestors seeking to topple the long-time ruler.

Mubarak knew this...and in a typically dictatorial move, the now-ousted president ordered the Internet shuttered and mobile phone services switched off.

It’s the kind of move one would expect of an oppressor - hardly the world’s poster child for freedom and democracy.

Could it happen in America?

It’s already happening...

Secretary of State Hillarious Clinton last week admonished Mubarak’s government for imposing an Internet blackout, calling it a baseless attempt to limit free speech during a time of social upheaval.

Can you believe that President Obama is pressing for a similar law that would give him the power to use an Internet “kill switch?” It would allow the president to block access to the web if an Egypt-style revolt or other unrest occurred in the U.S.

This power-grab is only one example of the U.S. government’s latest incursions on our civil liberties.

Democratic power brokers including the Obama White House and Senators Feinstein and Leahy teamed up with Republican leaders in Congress to extend three provisions in the Bush-era PATRIOT Act that give the government sweeping surveillance powers.

Nothing like “bipartisan cooperation” in Washington, eh?

Obama Wants to Read Your Email

Not to be outdone, Obama’s Department of Justice wants a new law, too.

This one would require Internet companies to retain data and records of user activity online. In doing so, the Obama administration is supporting measures advocated by the Bush administration that pose a grave threat to free speech and freedom of the Internet. The sweeping legislation would cover cell phone service, Internet records, and email.

If this legislation is passed, it would jeopardize the privacy of millions of Americans who use the Internet. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) notes, “A legal obligation to log users’ Internet use... would dangerously expand the government’s ability to surveil its citizens, damage privacy, and chill freedom of expression.”

Once again, congressional Republicans are more than happy to cooperate in passing such a law - anything to go after those awful terrorists... even if it shreds the U.S. Constitution.

Laptops Galore

Although they can cite no legal basis for their high-handed actions, the Department of Homeland Security claims that its agents have the right to look though the contents of an international traveler's electronic devices, including laptops, cameras and cell phones.

If only the injustice stopped there - agents can also keep the devices or copy the contents in order to continue searching them once the traveler has been allowed to enter the U.S., regardless of whether the traveler is suspected of any wrongdoing.

Documents obtained by the ACLU in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for records related to the DHS policy reveal that more than 6,600 travelers, nearly half of whom are American citizens, were subjected to electronic device searches at the border between October 1, 2008 and June 2, 2010.

No law authorizes this power nor is there any judicial or congressional body overseeing or regulating what DHS is doing. And the citizens to whom this is done have no recourse - not even to have their property returned to them.

FBI Run Amok

The Electronic Frontier Foundation recently reviewed nearly 2,500 pages of documents released by the FBI as a result of the Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The EFF revealed what I would call alarming trends in the Bureau’s intelligence investigation practices - FBI intelligence investigations have compromised the civil liberties of American citizens far more frequently, and to a greater extent, than previously assumed.

The FBI’s flagrant legal violations included submitting false or inaccurate declarations to courts, using improper evidence to obtain federal grand jury subpoenas and accessing password protected documents without a warrant. In at least one fifth of the cases, specific violations of the U.S. Constitution were cited.

Very Long Distance

Perhaps you recall the major uproar over President George W. Bush’s use of massive telephone and wire tap surveillance after the 9-11 terror.

Well, surprise, dear reader. With little notice, Obama’s Department of Justice now asserts that the FBI can obtain telephone your international call records without any formal legal process or court oversight.

The DoJ’s legal position is flawed and creates a potential loophole that could lead to a repeat of FBI abuses that should’ve stopped with a law that was passed in 2006.

The telephone record controversy is leftover from the Bush administration's war on terror. A hypocritical President Obama is continuing many of those same tactics, which he formerly said he opposed.

One year ago, the Inspector General's Office issued a lengthy report detailing that the FBI, for the years 2003-2005, had used "National Security Letters" (NSLs) to gather information on thousands of Americans in violation of the law. Under the PATRIOT Act, NSLs permit the FBI and other federal agencies to obtain all sorts of invasive information from telecoms, Internet and email providers - even health care providers - without any warrants or oversight of any kind.

And if you think this power is being aimed solely at suspected terrorists, think again. No wonder that some Swiss and other offshore banks refuse to discuss by telephone their accounts with Americans.

Freedom of Speech

The so-called Shield bill, introduced in response to the WikiLeaks disclosures, would amend the Espionage Act of 1917 to make it a crime for any person knowingly and willfully to disseminate classified information “concerning the human intelligence activities of the United States.”

This proposed law is constitutional as applied to government employees who unlawfully leak material to people who are unauthorized to receive it. But it violates the First Amendment to punish anyone who circulates the information after it has been leaked. At the very least, the act should be expressly limited to situations in which the spread of the classified information poses a clear and imminent danger to the nation.

A Plague on Both Houses

And by that I mean both political parties and both houses of the U.S. Congress - both of which seem to have lost their understanding of American history and an appreciation for the genius of our constitutional system.

Be assured that the Sovereign Society in this time of great troubles will continue to give you not only a truthful account of the threats we face - but also specific, legal ways and means to protect yourself, your family and your wealth.

Faithfully yours,

XXX XXXXXX

[Tiffany23]

bwsi45...very interesting. If possible can you pls go back and put in sources to back up these statements? Not that I don't trust what you say, but I find it difficult to think that there isn't some logical rational that a democratic president would try to restrict personal freedom. Usually it is vice versa.

Regardless, there is always a tight rope that democracies must walk as to making things both safer for their citizens and yet not restricting their freedom. For example, one of the safest countries in the world is Singapore and yet they are also one of the freest. As these sources illustrate, Singapore is ranked #4 in lowest homicide rate and #2 in freedom (just slightly below Hong Kong). While the US is ranked #9 in freedom and #102 in lowest homicide. YIKES!

The way I see it, I'm more than willing to give up some of my personal freedom (even god forbid turning in my guns) in order to feel safe. If you have ever traveled to Singapore you would be amazed at how wonderful the people are and how happy. That's just my

http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Edited February 17, 2011 by Tiffany23

[Deathmonkey]

This is the kind of post that drives me nuts.

Besides no sources for verification, it is another sign that people just don't like Obama, but with no real reason except for what they read via chain e-mails.

Why were these same people not in uproar when Bush passed the Patriot Act? Even this post brings up what Bush started, BUT makes sure you know Obama is moving forward with more procedures under the protection of the Patriot Act. Put blame where blame is due, and that is with W. He started this whole process of taking away our privacy!

[Tiffany23]

Sorry, I didn't finish my thought process and the point I was trying to make. Singapore also has some of the strictest personal rules when it comes to freedom for a first world country. For example, they don't allow citizens to own guns. They allow public floggings to those who commit, what to us would be considered minor offenses, such as graffiti. In fact, they have sever laws on chewing gun (they are afraid that it will gum up their subways). They wiretap and restrict what can be published in their newspapers.

But guess what...it works!

[Chape]

While I found this news to be true... I also found an update that states the DOJ have abandoned the request.

Below is part of a report.....

............................................

The U.S. Justice Department has abruptly abandoned what had become a high-profile court fight to read Yahoo users' e-mail messages without obtaining a search warrant first.

In a two-page brief filed Friday, the Obama administration withdrew its request for warrantless access to the complete contents of the Yahoo Mail accounts under investigation. CNET was the first to report on the Denver case in an article on Tuesday.

Yahoo's efforts to fend off federal prosecutors' broad request attracted allies--in the form of Google, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Progress and Freedom Foundation--who argued (PDF) that Americans who keep their e-mail in the cloud enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy that is protected by the U.S. Constitution.

Two years ago, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama had pledged that, as president, he would "strengthen privacy protections for the digital age." This dispute had the potential to test his administration's actual commitment to privacy, which recently became the subject of a legislative push supported by Silicon Valley firms and privacy advocates. The administration has taken a position at odds with that coalition in a second case in Philadelphia involving warrantless tracking of cell phones.

Much of the information about the case in federal court in Colorado remains unclear, including the nature of the possible crime being investigated, how many e-mail accounts are at issue, and whether it was the flurry of publicity in the last few days or something else that prompted the U.S. Attorney's office in Denver to back down.

The brief filed Friday says that Yahoo had turned over more information since March 3 and that "the government has concluded that further production of records and information by Yahoo would not be helpful to the government's investigation."

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002722-38.html#ixzz1EE6IkNQW

[drox]

Perhaps... If more people chose to enlighten themselves through things like gratefulness, forgiveness, kindness, and empathy you would have the world you truly want. Instead of using mindless drivel and constantly engaging in things like blame, hate, anger, materialism, and the incessant need for everything to be instantaneous. No one is trying to take your freedom away from you William Wallace. It is your hate and anger that leads to a more fragile society, not the decisions of our elected officials. Hating a couple politicians will not make your pain go away. It just compounds it. Go search for some real solutions in your life and figure out what your root problems are. Focus on things in your influence and not in your concern fields. ALL of our presidents made bad decisions, good decisions, and the best decisions they could given the variables they had to work with at the time. Give it a rest... it is tiresome and it's like being on a boat with 9 people rowing and the only one not rowing is the guy bitching in the back about the weather and us not going fast enough.

Just so you know... There are no monsters in your bed or in your closet either. Grow up.

Sincerely,

A 2-term GW Bush voter.

Edited February 17, 2011 by drox

[TimS]

On the surface......it could sound bad. Our gov wants to take away our freedoms, but come on, be smarter than the avaerage bear.......it's total BS. First of all, our basic principals were written almost 250 years ago, times have changed, so we have to change our principals along with them. If we don't keep evolving our laws to keep up with the ever changing and very intelligent criminals, the average person will be left defensless. The gov is just trying to do thier job and keep us safe.......and I agree with the earlier comment, it's always the guy doing the least who is complain ing the most....put a sock in it

[hardmoney1]

Perhaps... If more people chose to enlighten themselves through things like gratefulness, forgiveness, kindness, and empathy you would have the world you truly want. Instead of using mindless drivel and constantly engaging in things like blame, hate, anger, materialism, and the incessant need for everything to be instantaneous. No one is trying to take your freedom away from you William Wallace. It is your hate and anger that leads to a more fragile society, not the decisions of our elected officials. Hating a couple politicians will not make your pain go away. It just compounds it. Go search for some real solutions in your life and figure out what your root problems are. Focus on things in your influence and not in your concern fields. ALL of our presidents made bad decisions, good decisions, and the best decisions they could given the variables they had to work with at the time. Give it a rest... it is tiresome and it's like being on a boat with 9 people rowing and the only one not rowing is the guy bitching in the back about the weather and us not going fast enough.

Just so you know... There are no monsters in your bed or in your closet either. Grow up.

Sincerely,

A 2-term GW Bush voter.

So, "drox" in your version of life, does CONTEMPT come under gratefulness, kindness or empathy? ("grow up?" -Does Grow UP mean to "just think happy thoughts"?)

And while were at it - how about IGNORANCE of what is transpiring around you. Our Founding Fathers warned of the NEED for CONSTANT VIGILANCE concerning the trashing of our liberty, and our Constitution.

It is your greed (yours, mine, "ours on this site") at the very BASE for your speculation in the DINAR in the first place. This is not much different that buying LOTTERY tickets.

Just so you know... Adolf Hitler WAS a monster, killed over 2 million Jews, and the Church and MANY other people "thinking happy thoughts" IGNORED the flagrant signs, and, by doing so imperiled their "brothers and sisters" in Germany (to their shame). There are others...Stalin, Pol Pot, Khomeni, Hussein, etc., etc. OUR (FDR, a "progressive") sent more than 100,000 AMERICANS to internment camps because they were of Japanese descent in WW2 - SO, I wonder, does any of this bother you???????????? No monsters, right?

Here's to Hypocrisy!

[Kenneth]

bwsi45...very interesting. If possible can you pls go back and put in sources to back up these statements? Not that I don't trust what you say, but I find it difficult to think that there isn't some logical rational that a democratic president would try to restrict personal freedom. Usually it is vice versa.

Regardless, there is always a tight rope that democracies must walk as to making things both safer for their citizens and yet not restricting their freedom. For example, one of the safest countries in the world is Singapore and yet they are also one of the freest. As these sources illustrate, Singapore is ranked #4 in lowest homicide rate and #2 in freedom (just slightly below Hong Kong). While the US is ranked #9 in freedom and #102 in lowest homicide. YIKES!

The way I see it, I'm more than willing to give up some of my personal freedom (even god forbid turning in my guns) in order to feel safe. If you have ever traveled to Singapore you would be amazed at how wonderful the people are and how happy. That's just my

http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Why don't you move there then, I do not want to be ANYTHING LIKE them or any other country.

"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

"(T)he foundation of our national policy will be laid in the pure and immutable principles of private morality; ...the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained..." George Washington, First Inaugural, April 30 1789

"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams

"Political interest [can] never be separated in the long run from moral right"

"Can the liberties of a nation be sure when we remove their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people, that these liberties are a gift from God? Thomas Jefferson

"When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor..."

George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention

NOAH WEBSTER

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787)

Criminal Justice System

Singapore's Internal Security Act (ISA), Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (CLA), Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), and Undesirable Publications Act permit arrest and detention without warrant or judicial review. The ISA and CLA also authorize preventive detention. The MDA permits the Central Narcotics Bureau chief to detain suspected drug users for three years in "rehabilitation centers" without recourse to trial; those who relapse face extended prison terms and caning (even though relapse is a common milepost on the road to recovery from drug dependence).

Singapore's penal code mandates caning along with imprisonment for some 30 offenses, including drug and security offenses. Its use is optional for other crimes involving force. From January to September 2008, courts reportedly sentenced 4,078 males between ages 16 and 50 to caning. Women may not be caned.

Singapore is believed to have one of the world's highest per capita execution rates, although statistics are not made public. Most sentences involve some 20 drug-related offenses for which execution is mandatory and which, according to the MDA, require the alleged perpetrator to prove his innocence to escape conviction. Singapore remains vocal in its defense of the death penalty. In March 2009 Singapore defended the death penalty for drug offenses at the United Nations Human Rights Council, notwithstanding conclusions by UN human rights mechanisms and UN drug and human rights agencies that the death penalty for drug offenses violates international law.

Burma

On September 27, 2007, Singapore’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, George Yeo, the chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), issued a statement expressing ASEAN’s “revulsion” over the use of “violent force” to put down anti-government demonstrations in Burma. The statement called for a halt to the crackdown and the release of all political prisoners. ASEAN has since rejected interference in Burma’s internal affairs and its members even refused to allow Ibrahim Gambari, UN special envoy to Burma, to address their meeting. At this writing, Singapore has yet to indicate its willingness to reexamine the human rights implications of its own economic ties to Burma, including in sectors that directly benefit the Burmese military. Singapore-registered companies are active in Burma’s oil and natural gas industry, and the Burmese junta and its allies are believed to use Singapore for banking and other financial transactions.

[drox]

So, "drox" in your version of life, does CONTEMPT come under gratefulness, kindness or empathy? ("grow up?" -Does Grow UP mean to "just think happy thoughts"?)

And while were at it - how about IGNORANCE of what is transpiring around you. Our Founding Fathers warned of the NEED for CONSTANT VIGILANCE concerning the trashing of our liberty, and our Constitution.

It is your greed (yours, mine, "ours on this site") at the very BASE for your speculation in the DINAR in the first place. This is not much different that buying LOTTERY tickets.

Just so you know... Adolf Hitler WAS a monster, killed over 2 million Jews, and the Church and MANY other people "thinking happy thoughts" IGNORED the flagrant signs, and, by doing so imperiled their "brothers and sisters" in Germany (to their shame). There are others...Stalin, Pol Pot, Khomeni, Hussein, etc., etc. OUR (FDR, a "progressive") sent more than 100,000 AMERICANS to internment camps because they were of Japanese descent in WW2 - SO, I wonder, does any of this bother you???????????? No monsters, right?

Here's to Hypocrisy!

Hardmoney1... Thank you for making my point. First off... making your argument by using a metaphorical inference between any of our US President's and the bile and slugs of history you mention is ludicrous and reckless. Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot? Hussein?.... Obama? Now I truly understand what you mean with your statement "Ignorance of what is transpiring around you". Thank you for showing us this example in action with your statement.

I thank God for our founding fathers everyday for their vision and courage. Clearly you see me as some patsy handing out daisies. If so, that is a weak minded assessment on your part. Do you even understand what contempt means? I had to read your sentence 5 times and it still made no sense. Who's contempt? Yours? Mine? Obama's? I am suggesting the world would have less contempt if everyone practiced more of the other tools I mentioned. Yes... there is always a time when you MUST stand up and defend your rights and liberties because thugs happen/thugs exist. However, what you are confusing is the constant state of conflict that perhaps you or others find yourselves in from day to day because it has allowed to grow and fester into hate. You all get lost in it and it infects others. The original poster threw out bogus rumors, gossip, and innuendos to support his view. It is not defending liberty but spreading manure to the whole town (streets and all) versus just fertilizing his own fields. It is an opinion and I simply countered his opinion.

My frustration is that all of this hate fuels and teaches each new generation and our posterity to further the hate like a spreading virus. The goal is to further the conflict, the stress, and the judgement upon each other. This world has become unconscious. We know not what we do anymore. It is this growing hate that fosters the seed of demons like Hitler. Not elected officials that are trying to do right by his constituents as best as he can. You see...We are at the mercy of that stupid voice in our heads called the EGO that never shuts up. What is wrong with compassion and some understanding? I thought democracy is our insurance policy for never allowing for the creation of the kinds of thugs you mentioned? We have elected officials. We have checks and balances from the 3 branches. We have freedom of the press and speech. We have the rights to bear arms. These are part of the inalienable rights that protect our freedom.

BUT... it does not mean we should be reckless or unconscionable. We have a moral obligation that requires common sense to do the right thing. To take the higher road whenever possible. To choose the best method to be heard. When you sneeze on an airplane you do so with a tissue don't you? You don't stand up and sneeze whereby projecting everywhere. It is rooted in common sense, empathy, and responsibility of which are all part of the fundamental tools that support that conscious choice. There is always an audience around us and observing. Egypt chose peaceful protest and it worked. Ghandi chose peaceful protest and it worked. Martin Luther King chose peaceful protest and it worked. Iraq chooses secularism, confrontation, and corruption and it most clearly does not work. Communism does not work. Totalitarianism does not work. Let us focus for once on the things we do agree on and work to compromise on the other crap. Iraq should be a lesson to us on how stupid our emotions can take us into "hateful indecisionland." They are paralyzed by it... can't you see that?

I support your rights to your opinions wholeheartedly. But... can we do it with civil dialogue and with intelligent discussion versus the drive-by attacks that we are so custom to seeing from both the right and the left? It is stressful and exhausting. This is what I mean by my "grow up" comment to the poster. There is always a better way to get your point across then by using ridiculous assertions and gossip. Thanks for listening and my apologies for letting myself get worked up.

[Polecat85]

This is the kind of post that drives me nuts.

Besides no sources for verification, it is another sign that people just don't like Obama, but with no real reason except for what they read via chain e-mails.

Why were these same people not in uproar when Bush passed the Patriot Act? Even this post brings up what Bush started, BUT makes sure you know Obama is moving forward with more procedures under the protection of the Patriot Act. Put blame where blame is due, and that is with W. He started this whole process of taking away our privacy!

Conservatives railed against the Patriot Act. They still do.

[vern]

I see everyone wants to write disortations here. WOW--What gets me is that FREEDOM is FREEDOM. Right now you have the Freedom to talk about Freedom so Freedom can be had. This also gives you the Freedom to choose and to stand up for Freedom because if you didnt have the Freedom to stand up for Freedom you wouldnt have the Freedom to do so. Right now you can talk,walk, pray, talk about and go to church with GOD, 2nd Admendment guns,,food, housing,school,medicine,and all other things you enjoy. If you dont stand now you wont have the Freedom to do so and when someone comes along and says I wish -you will only be able to say We had Freedom once .Now we have sorrow. You choose--- I choose Freedom and i will not take anything less. If i have to die for it so someone else will have Freedom the it is so-Stand now or forever hold your peace. May GOD Bless you and keep you --Vern

[hardmoney1]

...Clearly you see me as some patsy handing out daisies... no, I perceived you as heaping contempt upon another while on your soap box of gratefulness, kindness, and empathy. Clearly you expressed no EMPATHY...though you claimed that as YOUR MESSAGE.

...OBAMA'S?????????? I NEITHER ALLUDED TO NOR REFERENCED OBAMA - IT WAS FDR (Franklin Delano Roosevelt) who interred the American Japanese (AND confiscated AMERICANS GOLD in 1933).

But... can we do it with civil dialogue and with intelligent discussion versus the drive-by attacks that we are so custom to seeing...This is what I mean by my "grow up" comment to the poster. There is always a better way to get your point across then by using ridiculous assertions and gossip. (AND STRIDENT HARANGUING)

Perhaps you meant this message for your own edification... grow up?...

To me, your message completely lacked the integrity to DEMONSTRATE what you were asking from the other post. I agree with you on your message, just NOT the delivery.

I certainly would entertain dialogue in person, as I really appears you are well read, and have a depth of thinking!

[Tiffany23]

Why don't you move there then, I do not want to be ANYTHING LIKE them or any other country.

"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

"(T)he foundation of our national policy will be laid in the pure and immutable principles of private morality; ...the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained..." George Washington, First Inaugural, April 30 1789

"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams

"Political interest [can] never be separated in the long run from moral right"

"Can the liberties of a nation be sure when we remove their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people, that these liberties are a gift from God? Thomas Jefferson

"When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor..."

George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention

NOAH WEBSTER

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787)

Criminal Justice System

Singapore's Internal Security Act (ISA), Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (CLA), Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), and Undesirable Publications Act permit arrest and detention without warrant or judicial review. The ISA and CLA also authorize preventive detention. The MDA permits the Central Narcotics Bureau chief to detain suspected drug users for three years in "rehabilitation centers" without recourse to trial; those who relapse face extended prison terms and caning (even though relapse is a common milepost on the road to recovery from drug dependence).

Singapore's penal code mandates caning along with imprisonment for some 30 offenses, including drug and security offenses. Its use is optional for other crimes involving force. From January to September 2008, courts reportedly sentenced 4,078 males between ages 16 and 50 to caning. Women may not be caned.

Singapore is believed to have one of the world's highest per capita execution rates, although statistics are not made public. Most sentences involve some 20 drug-related offenses for which execution is mandatory and which, according to the MDA, require the alleged perpetrator to prove his innocence to escape conviction. Singapore remains vocal in its defense of the death penalty. In March 2009 Singapore defended the death penalty for drug offenses at the United Nations Human Rights Council, notwithstanding conclusions by UN human rights mechanisms and UN drug and human rights agencies that the death penalty for drug offenses violates international law.

Burma

On September 27, 2007, Singapore’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, George Yeo, the chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), issued a statement expressing ASEAN’s “revulsion” over the use of “violent force” to put down anti-government demonstrations in Burma. The statement called for a halt to the crackdown and the release of all political prisoners. ASEAN has since rejected interference in Burma’s internal affairs and its members even refused to allow Ibrahim Gambari, UN special envoy to Burma, to address their meeting. At this writing, Singapore has yet to indicate its willingness to reexamine the human rights implications of its own economic ties to Burma, including in sectors that directly benefit the Burmese military. Singapore-registered companies are active in Burma’s oil and natural gas industry, and the Burmese junta and its allies are believed to use Singapore for banking and other financial transactions.

Some villiage is looking for it's idiot...so please go home. Come back when you have some manner and have ever visited the place. You gobshight.

[Gut Feelings]

bwsi45

You make a lot of serious accusations, and I don't see any links to back up what you say. The President may be the head of this country, but the senators and congressmen that YOU voted for control the nation. They have the power to not pass any laws you don't want to see pass, so I suggest that YOU talk to your congress & senate reps and tell them what YOU want them to do.... or better yet...... why don't YOU run for President and the world will be a better place for everyone right?

I'm so sick of people bashing the President for EVERYTHING. You think YOU can do a better job? Then run for President in 2012....see how YOU do at the job! Walk a mile in Mr. Obama's shoes and see what America thinks of YOU!!!

While you have their attention..... tell them that YOU want to stop their health plan and they will have to pay for it like everyone else. Tell them that once they are out of office....they will have to file for unemployment like the rest of us...or get another job somewhere! The tax payers are tired of paying their senate income until they die. Tell them to pay into Social Security.

[Carrello]

This is the kind of post that drives me nuts.

Besides no sources for verification, it is another sign that people just don't like Obama, but with no real reason except for what they read via chain e-mails.

Why were these same people not in uproar when Bush passed the Patriot Act? Even this post brings up what Bush started, BUT makes sure you know Obama is moving forward with more procedures under the protection of the Patriot Act. Put blame where blame is due, and that is with W. He started this whole process of taking away our privacy!

Ditto...

Hardmoney1... Thank you for making my point. First off... making your argument by using a metaphorical inference between any of our US President's and the bile and slugs of history you mention is ludicrous and reckless. Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot? Hussein?.... Obama? Now I truly understand what you mean with your statement "Ignorance of what is transpiring around you". Thank you for showing us this example in action with your statement.

I thank God for our founding fathers everyday for their vision and courage. Clearly you see me as some patsy handing out daisies. If so, that is a weak minded assessment on your part. Do you even understand what contempt means? I had to read your sentence 5 times and it still made no sense. Who's contempt? Yours? Mine? Obama's? I am suggesting the world would have less contempt if everyone practiced more of the other tools I mentioned. Yes... there is always a time when you MUST stand up and defend your rights and liberties because thugs happen/thugs exist. However, what you are confusing is the constant state of conflict that perhaps you or others find yourselves in from day to day because it has allowed to grow and fester into hate. You all get lost in it and it infects others. The original poster threw out bogus rumors, gossip, and innuendos to support his view. It is not defending liberty but spreading manure to the whole town (streets and all) versus just fertilizing his own fields. It is an opinion and I simply countered his opinion.

My frustration is that all of this hate fuels and teaches each new generation and our posterity to further the hate like a spreading virus. The goal is to further the conflict, the stress, and the judgement upon each other. This world has become unconscious. We know not what we do anymore. It is this growing hate that fosters the seed of demons like Hitler. Not elected officials that are trying to do right by his constituents as best as he can. You see...We are at the mercy of that stupid voice in our heads called the EGO that never shuts up. What is wrong with compassion and some understanding? I thought democracy is our insurance policy for never allowing for the creation of the kinds of thugs you mentioned? We have elected officials. We have checks and balances from the 3 branches. We have freedom of the press and speech. We have the rights to bear arms. These are part of the inalienable rights that protect our freedom.

BUT... it does not mean we should be reckless or unconscionable. We have a moral obligation that requires common sense to do the right thing. To take the higher road whenever possible. To choose the best method to be heard. When you sneeze on an airplane you do so with a tissue don't you? You don't stand up and sneeze whereby projecting everywhere. It is rooted in common sense, empathy, and responsibility of which are all part of the fundamental tools that support that conscious choice. There is always an audience around us and observing. Egypt chose peaceful protest and it worked. Ghandi chose peaceful protest and it worked. Martin Luther King chose peaceful protest and it worked. Iraq chooses secularism, confrontation, and corruption and it most clearly does not work. Communism does not work. Totalitarianism does not work. Let us focus for once on the things we do agree on and work to compromise on the other crap. Iraq should be a lesson to us on how stupid our emotions can take us into "hateful indecisionland." They are paralyzed by it... can't you see that?

I support your rights to your opinions wholeheartedly. But... can we do it with civil dialogue and with intelligent discussion versus the drive-by attacks that we are so custom to seeing from both the right and the left? It is stressful and exhausting. This is what I mean by my "grow up" comment to the poster. There is always a better way to get your point across then by using ridiculous assertions and gossip. Thanks for listening and my apologies for letting myself get worked up.

Thank you...

[rjboots1]

Just a few points to make:

1) The President, without the Congress, has sole authority to do enough damage to ultimately doom the future of the nation, simply through appointments, pressure, and executive order. So, if there are problems, the buck many time DOES in fact stop in the oval office. Many of our problems in this nation today never saw the floor of the Congress. (i.e. QE2)

2) Yes, tyranny and communism work, but only for the tyrannt and his underlings. But it doesn't work for the citizens. Because of the nature of man, power and greed will always take "control" to a level which is oppresive. And if they're careful about how they implement change, the populus will not even know they're becoming oppressed until it's too late. Kind of like slow-cooking a frog, he'll sit there and die and not even try to get away.

3) This country's economy historically has flourished at times when the size and scope of government has been restricted. As governments grow, their citizens' rights and freedoms are restricted. That's just the way it is. Our Federal government right now is larger, more expensive, and hence more oppressive, than at any time in our history.

4) Our Constitution is a work of sheer genius, authored by one of the most intelligent men that ever lived. It's two primary hallmarks are, first, the foundation of our nation and it's government is built upon the principles of the Word of God and acknowledgement of His Sovereignty. Secondly, the powers of the Federal government are restricted to those which are specifically given to it, and all other authority is to be retained by the states. Our current Federal government ignores both of these foundational principles. Our current president does not acknowledge the sovereignty of the God of the Bible over this nation. Nor does he have any intentions of limiting the power of the Federal government in any way, regardless of what the Constitution says.

[20MillionDinar]

bwsi45

You make a lot of serious accusations, and I don't see any links to back up what you say. The President may be the head of this country, but the senators and congressmen that YOU voted for control the nation. They have the power to not pass any laws you don't want to see pass, so I suggest that YOU talk to your congress & senate reps and tell them what YOU want them to do.... or better yet...... why don't YOU run for President and the world will be a better place for everyone right?

I'm so sick of people bashing the President for EVERYTHING. You think YOU can do a better job? Then run for President in 2012....see how YOU do at the job! Walk a mile in Mr. Obama's shoes and see what America thinks of YOU!!!

While you have their attention..... tell them that YOU want to stop their health plan and they will have to pay for it like everyone else. Tell them that once they are out of office....they will have to file for unemployment like the rest of us...or get another job somewhere! The tax payers are tired of paying their senate income until they die. Tell them to pay into Social Security.

By the way, Barack Obama makes close to half a million dollars a year regardless of being President. I hardly believe somebody of his caliber would ever have to file for unemployment. Just saying...

***I am not directing this only towards the person who posted the above. I pushed "quote" before I posted this info. Please don't take it personal. This is only "FYI"

You don't have to believe a word that was posted or you can decide for yourself to research and come to your own conclusion. For your information, this content came from one of the most respected investment advisory firm there is. Go ahead and google the "title" and find out for yourself if you are interested. This information came first hand from an "ex" member of the U.S. house of representatives. Bob Bauman...

I try to obtain my information from firms who are not biased meaning they don't take sides or take bribes from one side or the other. Just the facts... Personally I don't think it is Obama's fault but I do believe he is a puppet for the powers that be. Doesn't matter if it is the puppet on the left or the puppet on the right.

Edited February 18, 2011 by 20MillionDinar

[BanG]

Perhaps... If more people chose to enlighten themselves through things like gratefulness, forgiveness, kindness, and empathy you would have the world you truly want. Instead of using mindless drivel and constantly engaging in things like blame, hate, anger, materialism, and the incessant need for everything to be instantaneous. No one is trying to take your freedom away from you William Wallace. It is your hate and anger that leads to a more fragile society, not the decisions of our elected officials. Hating a couple politicians will not make your pain go away. It just compounds it. Go search for some real solutions in your life and figure out what your root problems are. Focus on things in your influence and not in your concern fields. ALL of our presidents made bad decisions, good decisions, and the best decisions they could given the variables they had to work with at the time. Give it a rest... it is tiresome and it's like being on a boat with 9 people rowing and the only one not rowing is the guy bitching in the back about the weather and us not going fast enough.

Just so you know... There are no monsters in your bed or in your closet either. Grow up.

Sincerely,

A 2-term GW Bush voter.

I voted twice for him too!! I'm not an Obama hater I just think he is clueless, spineless and a piss poor leader.........nuff said. IMO the events happening globally are needed and were predicted so as to allow the beginning of events such as this to happen, people are desperate and at this point will settle for pretty much anything. See below.

* IMF calls for New Global Currency February 17, 2011 10:20 pm · Posted in NEWS (Iraq & World Currency) · Comments Off Location: D.C., Washington, United States

Published: February 11, 2011 04:36 am EST

International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn called Thursday for a new global currency to challenge the dollar’s dominance and reduce financial instability.

In lieu of relying mainly on the greenback, Strauss-Kahn said in a speech in Washington that reserves of member-countries or special drawing rights (SDRs) held by the IMF could be used in pricing international trade.

Using SDRs would provide a buffer from exchange rate volatility. The IMF official said the fund could issue SDR-denominated bonds that would create a potentially new class of reserve assets. The proposal is also found in a policy paper published by the IMF.

Strauss-Kahn told the gathering of top-level economists to tackle the future of the international monetary system that the IMF should start to include the Chinese yuan in the basket of currencies it uses to value the SDRs. The current basket includes the dollar, sterling, euro and yen.

China holds up to $2.85 trillion of reserves in U.S. Treasury bonds and has expressed several times unease about the value of the dollar. However, American politicians in turn have complained that China enjoys unfair advantage by keeping the yuan cheap.

Stauss-Kahn pointed out that global imbalances such as large and volatile capital outflows, exchange rate pressures and fast growing excess reserves have returned. If these issues remain unresolved, he warned it could start the seeds of the next crisis.

SDRs were initially used in 1969 in support of the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system. However, after that the role of SDRs declined but in 2009 at the London G20 meeting, world leaders agreed to boost SDRs to $250 billion. The hike led to speculations that SDRs may play a major role again in the global monetary system.

link

You decide if this seems to be the path were headed down.

[dinardlee]

Not going to go into specifics right now but let's say

Obama believes in distribution of wealth, which I do not agree with.

I believe in economic conservatism and social liberalism.

Welfare is out of control in this country, I can't count how many times I've seen people use their EBIT (welfare food stamps card), while buying liquir and cigarettes with cash, with name brand jackets, boots, 200 dollar iphones, and hop into their nice SUV and drive away. I'm simply tired of paying for others luxury.

[thunderrb]

America has serious problems and it will take serious people to help solve our current situation. There is enough blame to go around. There is an old saying, "LEAD,FOLLOW, OR GET OUT OF THE WAY". John F. Kennedy said," Don't ask what your Country can do for you, ask what you can do for your Country."You ar either part of the problem or part of the solution. We live in the GREATEST Country in the world. I faithfully served 21 years in the MIlitary, been in 39 Countries, there is no where better then the good old USA....."United we stand, Divided we fall". DR. King said," I have dream." it is still true 40 years later. We need to keep the dream alive...Keep the faith, stay strong, we will survive....

[no left angles]

This is the kind of post that drives me nuts.

Besides no sources for verification, it is another sign that people just don't like Obama, but with no real reason except for what they read via chain e-mails.

Why were these same people not in uproar when Bush passed the Patriot Act? Even this post brings up what Bush started, BUT makes sure you know Obama is moving forward with more procedures under the protection of the Patriot Act. Put blame where blame is due, and that is with W. He started this whole process of taking away our privacy!

glad someone has stated the obvious....makes me wonder why people really dont like Obama an company......

to you sir

[bwsi45]

bwsi45...very interesting. If possible can you pls go back and put in sources to back up these statements? Not that I don't trust what you say, but I find it difficult to think that there isn't some logical rational that a democratic president would try to restrict personal freedom. Usually it is vice versa.

Regardless, there is always a tight rope that democracies must walk as to making things both safer for their citizens and yet not restricting their freedom. For example, one of the safest countries in the world is Singapore and yet they are also one of the freest. As these sources illustrate, Singapore is ranked #4 in lowest homicide rate and #2 in freedom (just slightly below Hong Kong). While the US is ranked #9 in freedom and #102 in lowest homicide. YIKES!

The way I see it, I'm more than willing to give up some of my personal freedom (even god forbid turning in my guns) in order to feel safe. If you have ever traveled to Singapore you would be amazed at how wonderful the people are and how happy. That's just my

http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Sorry but I was asked by Adam to leave that info out. All I can say is that it came from a reliable source.

[jimmey309]

The idea that some nation is going to tell

its people what type of food they can ingest

is extremely unfortunate IMHO .

Where does the invasion into our lives end ?

I don't know how we fight these power mongers ,

but we must.

Or eventually prepare to lose all our freedoms.

We can only do this together.

I just do not know how we do it.

But we better start working on it ASAP.

Otherwise, we could easily see all of our liberties

disappear.

Is life really that good in the US ?

Are we really free ?

Do we have the money

and resources to take care of our families ?

I have always believed the only way to make real

positive changes is to work from within the system.

The protesters, the power brokers can handle.

It is the infiltrators they can not stop / control IMHO.

Not being able to chew gum is only the start.

It is a sign of what's ahead IMHO.

If I was not permitted to chew gum by my government,

I might not openly say anything

against my government

or even give the implication of any modicum

of impropriety by my government.

Who knows what they would do to anyone

that said anything negative about them.

[Soldiering4U]

Hey Tiff, I would normally agree with you but in your first post you suggested taking away guns... did you know that in cities where guns are not allowed there is a huge crime rate above the rest of the nation... do you know why?..... Because all the bad guys are the ones with the guns... so as for me and my family we will keep our Bible on the table and Our GUNS on our hips.

That gun toatin' Bible carryin Conservative that Obama warned you about...