
Archive for 'police state'
Surveillance State
7 Rules for Recording Police
Good advice from Reason Magazine:
Courts are expanding rights but cops are cracking down. Find out how to keep your footage, and yourself, out of trouble.
Steve Silverman | April 5, 2012
Last week the City of Boston agreed to pay Simon Glik $170,000 in damages and legal fees to settle a civil rights lawsuit stemming from his 2007 felony arrest for videotaping police roughing up a suspect. Prior to the settlement, the First Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that Glik had a “constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public.” The Boston Police Department now explicitly instructs its officers not to arrest citizens openly recording them in public.
Slowly but surely the courts are recognizing that recording on-duty police is a protected First Amendment activity. But in the meantime, police around the country continue to intimidate and arrest citizens for doing just that. So if you’re an aspiring cop watcher you must be uniquely prepared to deal with hostile cops.
If you choose to record the police you can reduce the risk of terrible legal consequences and video loss by understanding your state’s laws and carefully adhering to the following rules.
Rule #1: Know the Law (Wherever You Are)
Conceived at a time when pocket-sized recording devices were available only to James Bond types, most eavesdropping laws were originally intended to protect people against snoops, spies, and peeping Toms. Now with this technology in the hands of average citizens, police and prosecutors are abusing these outdated laws to punish citizens merely attempting to document on-duty police.
The law in 38 states plainly allows citizens to record police, as long as you don’t physically interfere with their work. Police might still unfairly harass you, detain you, or confiscate your camera. They might even arrest you for some catchall misdemeanor such as obstruction of justice or disorderly conduct. But you will not be charged for illegally recording police.
Twelve states—California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington—require the consent of all parties for you to record a conversation.
However, all but 2 of these states—Massachusetts and Illinois—have an “expectation of privacy provision” to their all-party laws that courts have ruled does not apply to on-duty police (or anyone in public). In other words, it’s technically legal in those 48 states to openly record on-duty police.
Rule #2 Don’t Secretly Record Police
In most states it’s almost always illegal to record a conversation in which you’re not a party and don’t have consent to record. Massachusetts is the only state to uphold a conviction for recording on-duty police, but that conviction was for a secret recording where the defendant failed to inform police he was recording. (As in the Glik case, Massachusetts courts have ruled that openly recording police is legal, but secretly recording them isn’t.)
Fortunately, judges and juries are soundly rejecting these laws. Illinois, the state with the most notorious anti-recording laws in the land, expressly forbids you from recording on-duty police. Early last month an Illinois judge declared that law unconstitutional, ruling in favor of Chris Drew, a Chicago artist charged with felony eavesdropping for secretly recording his own arrest. Last August a jury acquitted Tiawanda Moore of secretly recording two Chicago Police Internal Affairs investigators who encouraged her to drop a sexual harassment complaint against another officer. (A juror described the case to a reporter as “a waste of time.”) In September, an Illinois state judge dropped felony charges against Michael Allison. After running afoul of local zoning ordinances, he faced up to 75 years in prison for secretly recording police and attempting to tape his own trial.
The lesson for you is this: If you want to limit your legal exposure and present a strong legal case, record police openly if possible. But if you videotape on-duty police from a distance, such an announcement might not be possible or appropriate unless police approach you.
Rule #3: Respond to “Shit Cops Say”When it comes to police encounters, you don’t get to choose whom you’re dealing with. You might get Officer Friendly, or you might get Officer Psycho. You’ll likely get officers between these extremes. But when you “watch the watchmen,” you must be ready to think on your feet.
In most circumstances, officers will not immediately bull rush you for filming them. But if they aren’t properly trained, they might feel like their authority is being challenged. And all too often police are simply ignorant of the law. Part of your task will be to convince them that you’re not a threat while also standing your ground.
“What are you doing?”
Police aren’t celebrities, so they’re not always used to being photographed in public. So even if you’re recording at a safe distance, they might approach and ask what you are doing. Avoid saying things like “I’m recording you to make sure you’re doing your job right” or “I don’t trust you.”
Instead, say something like “Officer, I’m not interfering. I’m asserting my First Amendment rights. You’re being documented and recorded offsite.”
Saying this while remaining calm and cool will likely put police on their best behavior. They might follow up by asking, “Who do you work for?” You may, for example, tell them you’re an independent filmmaker or a citizen journalist with a popular website/blog/YouTube show. Whatever you say, don’t lie—but don’t let police trick you into thinking that the First Amendment only applies to mainstream media journalists. It doesn’t.
“Let me see your ID.”
In the United States there’s no law requiring you to carry a government ID. But in 24 states police may require you to identify yourself if they have reasonable suspicion that you’re involved in criminal activity.
But how can you tell if an officer asking for ID has reasonable suspicion? Police need reasonable suspicion to detain you, so one way to tell if they have reasonable suspicion is to determine if you’re free to go. You can do this by saying “Officer, are you detaining me, or am I free to go?”
If the officer says you’re free to go or you’re not being detained, it’s your choice whether to stay or go. But if you’re detained, you might say something like, “I’m not required to show you ID, but my name is [your full name].” It’s up to you if you want to provide your address and date of birth if asked for it, but I’d stop short of giving them your Social Security number.
“Please stop recording me. It’s against the law.”
Rarely is it advisable to educate officers about the law. But in a tense recording situation where the law is clearly on your side, it might help your case to politely present your knowledge of state law.
For example, if an insecure cop tries to tell you that you’re violating his civil liberties, you might respond by saying “Officer, with all due respect, state law only requires permission from one party in a conversation. I don’t need your permission to record so long as I’m not interfering with your work.”
If you live in one of the 12 all party record states, you might say something like “Officer, I’m familiar with the law, but the courts have ruled that it doesn’t apply to recording on-duty police.”
If protective service officers harass you while filming on federal property, you may remind them of a recently issued directive informing them that there’s no prohibition against public photography at federal buildings.
“Stand back.”
If you’re approaching the scene of an investigation or an accident, police will likely order you to move back. Depending on the circumstances, you might become involved in an intense negotiation to determine the “appropriate” distance you need to stand back to avoid “interfering” with their work.
If you feel you’re already standing at a reasonable distance, you may say something like, “Officer, I have a right to be here. I’m filming for documentation purposes and not interfering with your work.” It’s then up to you to decide how far back you’re willing to stand to avoid arrest.
Rule #4: Don’t Share Your Video with Police
If you capture video of police misconduct or brutality, but otherwise avoid being identified yourself, you can anonymously upload it to YouTube. This seems to be the safest legal option. For example, a Massachusetts woman who videotaped a cop beating a motorist with a flashlight posted the video to the Internet. Afterwards, one of the cops caught at the scene filed criminal wiretapping charges against her. (As usual, the charges against her were later dropped.)On the other hand, an anonymous videographer uploaded footage of an NYPD officer body-slamming a man on a bicycle to YouTube. Although the videographer was never revealed, the video went viral. Consequently, the manufactured assault charges against the bicyclist were dropped, the officer was fired, and the bicyclist eventually sued the city and won a $65,000 settlement.
Rule #5: Prepare to be ArrestedKeene, New Hampshire resident Dave Ridley is the avatar of the new breed of journalist/activist/filmmaker testing the limits of the First Amendment right to record police. Over the past few years he’s uploaded the most impressive collection of first-person police encounter videos I’ve ever seen.
Ridley’s calm demeanor and knowledge of the law paid off last August after he was arrested for trespassing at an event featuring Vice President Joe Biden. The arresting officers at his trial claimed he refused to leave when ordered to do so. But the judge acquitted him when his confiscated video proved otherwise.
With respect to the law Ridley declares, “If you’re rolling the camera, be very open and upfront about it. And look at it as a potential act of civil disobedience for which you could go to jail.” It’s indeed disturbing that citizens who are not breaking the law should prepare to be arrested, but in the current legal fog this is sage advice.
“Shut it off, or I’ll arrest you.”
At this point you are risking arrest in order to test the boundaries of free speech. So if police say they’ll arrest you, believe them. You may comply by saying something like “Okay, Officer. But I’m turning the camera off under protest.”
If you keep recording, brace yourself for arrest. Try your best not to drop your camera, but do not physically resist. As with any arrest, you have the right to remain silent until you speak with a lawyer. Use it.
Remember that the camera might still be recording. So keep calm and act like you’re being judged by a jury of millions of your YouTube peers, because one day you might be.
Rule #6: Master Your TechnologySmartphone owners now outnumber users of more basic phones. At any moment there are more than 100 million Americans in reach of a device that can capture police misconduct and share it with the world in seconds.
If you’re one of them, you should consider installing a streaming video recording and sharing app such as Qik or Bambuser. Both apps are free and easy to use.
Always Passcode Protect Your Smartphone
The magic of both apps is that they can instantly store your video offsite. This is essential for preserving video in case police illegally destroy or confiscate your camera. But even with these apps installed, you’ll want to make sure that your device is always passcode protected. If a cop snatches your camera, this will make it extremely difficult for her to simply delete your videos. (If a cop tries to trick you into revealing your passcode, never, never, never give it up!)
Keep in mind that Qik and Bambuser’s offsite upload feature might be slow or nonexistent in places without Wi-Fi or a strong 3G/4G signal. Regardless, your captured video will be saved locally on your device until you’ve got a good enough signal to upload offsite.
Set Videos to “Private”
Both apps allow you to set your account to automatically upload videos as “private” (only you can see them) or “public” (everyone can see them). But until police are no longer free to raid the homes of citizens who capture and upload YouTube videos of them going berserk, it’s probably wise to keep your default setting to “private.”
With a little bit of practice you should be able to pull your smartphone from your pocket or purse, turn it on, enter your passcode, open the app, and hit record within 10 seconds. Keep your preferred app easily accessible on your home screen to save precious seconds. But don’t try to shave milliseconds off your time by disabling your passcode.
Both apps share an important feature that allows your video to be saved if your phone is turned off—even if you’re still recording. So if you anticipate that a cop is about to grab your phone, quickly turn it off. Without your passcode, police won’t be able to delete your videos or personal information even if they confiscate or destroy your phone.
With the iPhone 4 and Samsung Galaxy Android devices I tested, when the phone is turned off the Qik app immediately stops recording and uploads the video offsite. But if the phone is turned off while Bambuser records, the recording continues after the screen goes black.
This Bambuser “black out” feature is a double-edged sword. While it could easily trick cops into thinking you’re not recording them, using it could push you into more dangerous legal territory. As previously mentioned, courts have shown a willingness to convict citizens for secretly recording police. So if you’re somehow caught using this feature it might be easier for a prosecutor to convince a judge or jury that you’ve broken the law. It’s up to you to decide if the increased legal risk is worth the potential to capture incriminating police footage.
Other Recording Options
Cameras lacking offsite recording capability are a less desirable option. As mentioned earlier, if cops delete or destroy your footage—which happens way too often—you might lose your only hope of challenging their version of events in court. But if you can hold on to your camera, there are some good options.
Carlos Miller is a Miami-based photojournalism activist and writer of the popular Photography is Not a Crime blog. While he carries a professional-end Canon XA10 in the field, he says “I never leave home without a Flip camera on a belt pouch. It’s a very decent camera that’s easier to carry around.”
The top-of-the-line Flip UltraHD starts at $178, but earlier models are available for $60 on Amazon. All flip models have one-button recording, which allows you to pull it out of your pocket and shoot within seconds. The built-in USB then lets you upload video to YouTube or other sharing sites through your PC.
Small businessman and “radical technology” educator Justin Holmes recommends the Canon S-series line of cameras. In 2008, his camera captured a police encounter he had while rollerblading in Port Dickenson, New York. His footage provides an outstanding real-life example of how a calm camera-toting citizen can intelligently flex their rights.
“I typically carry a Canon S5-IS,” Holmes says. “But if I was going to buy one new, I’d go for the SX40-HS. If I were on a budget and buying one used, I’d go for S2-IS or S3-IS.” The features he regards as essential include one-touch video, high-quality stereo condenser microphones, fast zoom during video, and 180×270 variable angle LCD. But the last feature he regards as “absolutely essential.” With it the user can glance at the viewfinder while the camera is below or above eye level.
Penn Jillette Traffic Stop
Police Traffic Stop: Fishing Expeditions and How To Protect Yourself
Watch the the following three videos to see how some police officers ply their trade. There was a time when the norm was the existence of “peace officers” who helped keep the peace. Now, the norm is “law enforcers” who seek to build their resumes with busts and generate revenue for their departments by enforcing any one of the numerous, victimless laws that are on the books.
How do you protect yourself?
Arm yourself and your friends with cameras and record every encounter. Know in advance how you are going to conduct yourself. After watching the videos below make sure to read the “Nine Things That Happen When You Film Police Encounters”:
Nine Things That Happen When You Film Police Encounters
by Austin White

Anyone who has ever filmed a police encounter and put it on YouTube has received some, or a lot, of negative comments for their actions. This is mostly due to a lack of understanding among the general public as to why someone would want to film police as they are detaining or arresting someone.
To explain, here are nine things that are achieved by filming police:
1. You’re exercising your right to film police. You do have the right to film cops. This right is codified in the Constitution under the First Amendment. In the past year, New England’s highest Federal court ruled that filming cops is protected by the First Amendment. You don’t need any special reason for doing so. You don’t need permission from any bureaucrat. You don’t have to work for a big media outlet. Get a camera and a YouTube channel and you are officially media. Congratulations and film away. If you don’t exercise your rights, they atrophy. Exercise them.
2. In the case where you are recording someone else’s police encounter, like a neighbor or friend, you are significantly reducing their chances of being the victim of police misconduct. Police will be less likely to perform unwarranted searches, plant drugs, beat the person, rape the person, murder the person, or arrest them on trumped up charges if they know there are cameras around recording their every move. You’re reducing the extent to which the predatory armed enforcers are likely to harass their prey. Police-accountability activist Antonio Buehler was possibly facing years in prison for allegedly assaulting an officer until he later obtained video evidence from bystanders that refuted the claims of the cop.
3. In the case where you are recording your own police encounter, you could be saving yourself from a potentially life-destroying event. You could be preventing yourself from going to prison. Anyone who thinks they are not at risk of being arrested is quite oblivious to the number of “laws” on the books, as well as the vagueness of those laws and the ability of the state to interpret those laws however they want in order to put you in a cage. Every American is now at a palpable risk of being arrested and jailed at some point — unless you’re a cop.
My friend Tj was pulled over by police a year and half ago over a malfunctioning tag light. Immediately the gang of cops went into overkill mode and began ordering him out of the vehicle, were pulling on his door handle, and suspiciously claiming he dropped something out of the car window. Eventually the police began threatening to pull TJ out of the vehicle and claiming that he might be a danger to the officers (cop language for “get out or we can kill you”) — all over a tag light. You can see the video for yourself to see how Tj recording the encounter with his cell phone quickly deterred the cops from perpetrating further harassment.
4. You inspire others to stand up to cops and demand accountability. Standing up to cops is scary. They can quite literally kill you and get away with it, as well as everything below killing. When you film cops and deter them from engaging in misconduct you become a beacon of peaceful resistance to the police-state for other people to emulate.
5. You remind the cops (allow me to put on my minarchist hat) that they are our servants and we are their masters. We pay the police with our tax dollars to provide security and protect our rights. We are the employers and the police are the employees. We have every right to monitor our employees to make sure they’re doing their job right. This is especially essential now that police have become routine rights violators and are far more likely to violate people’s rights than private criminals are.
The state watches us, reads our emails, listens in our phone conversations, and is putting more and more cameras around to surveil us in public places — is it really that unreasonable for us to watch the watchers a little bit, especially when they are actively looking for ways to put anyone they can into cages?
6. You are exercising the only real check we have on the police-state besides civil disobedience (which is becoming more appealing everyday) and armed rebellion.
Police investigate themselves and are the arbiters of disputes involving themselves. How does the average person stand a chance against that? Bad cops are very rarely found guilty for their crimes and when they are found guilty the punishment they often receive is a modicum of what the average American would receive.
In the fall of 2010, Orlando Copwatch did a lengthy investigation of an incident where OPD officer Travis Lamont body-slammed an 84-year-old man onto pavement and broke his neck — simply because the old man committed the heinous crime of touching Lamont’s shoulder. Despite the fact that numerous witnesses called the police station in outrage and spoke to the media about the horrific behavior of Lamont, Orlando Police Chief Val Demings and six other senior officials cleared Lamont of any wrong doing and he lurks the streets of Orlando to this day.
The only effective method we have for dealing with bad cops is filming them in the act and putting it on YouTube so they can receive the shame and ostracism they deserve. If someone had been able to capture footage of Officer Lamont’s actions that night and put in on YouTube for it to go viral Lamont may have ended up in prison where he truly belongs.
7. You are preparing cops to get used to being filmed. Every year the price of cameras goes down, the quality goes up, the size of cameras goes down, the ability to conceal cameras increases, we now have the ability to upload live footage to websites like Qik.com, and there is a growing movement of people happily willing to use these tools to keep police accountable. There is nothing the cops can do about it. The bureaucrats can write whatever laws they want to stop us, but the market will help us get around them. When you get out there and start filming cops you’re giving police a friendly reminder that soon every cop’s every move will be monitored by the tax payers and that they better start acting more civilized. You’re stimulating a feeling among police that they are being watched.
8. You’re standing up for your rights and your fellow citizen’s rights and will feel damn good about it. You’ll be able to look back and know that you didn’t submit to the police-state like some slave. The preservation of your dignity and spirit is worth the risks of filming cops.
9. You are reducing the amount of tyranny that your kids will live under.
Yes, filming police is dangerous, but day-to-day life in the totalitarian Amerika that will develop as a result of our apathy will be far more dangerous. Now is the time to film cops; not later. The police-state will only get more severe if we don’t act now, which means it will only get harder to keep police accountable if we back down.(source)
“Ten signs our own government is about to declare war on us”
From SilverUnderground:
All tinfoil humor aside, every single indication in recent years has been that the regime in Washington is increasingly treating the American people like we’re the enemy– like the global war on terror is actually a war on us– and this is a trend that has only been accelerating to a frightening pace in the last few, short months. Every time I turn my head there’s another new bill or executive order shredding the last remnants of our constitutionally-guaranteed civil liberties and declaring us all potential terrorists or terror suspects. The heavy hand of the ramped-up and ready-to-go national security apparatus that Bush and Obama have been hard at work to build is now coming down on you and me. Frankly, if you’re not getting a little scared, you’re the one who’s out of your mind. Here’s why:
1. The NDAA
Obama threatened to veto this bill, but I didn’t get my hopes up. He signed it of course, and this most recent national defense authorization includes a provision allowing the U.S. military, at the direction of the White House, to arrest U.S. citizens on U.S. soil if they are suspected of terrorism (whatever that means??) and to detain them indefinitely without charges or a civilian trial. Dictatorship has come to America, the entire country is now a war zone, and you could be considered an “enemy combatant” just because the president says you’re one.
2. The Patriot Act Renewal
The Patriot Act is one of the most hated bills from the early Bush Era, so with a Democrat in the White House who promised “change” and a Democratically-controlled Senate, you would think that sunset provisions in the Patriot Act would start to phase out its attacks on our Bill of Rights and civil liberties, right? Wrong. As key provisions of the Patriot Act that violate the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments to the Constitution were set to expire last May, a fight ensued to renew them, and it was Senate Democrats who led the charge to have them renewed as well as to stifle an earnest debate over their legality and necessity. A government at peace with its people would not fight so hard for the power to illegally spy on them. Something has gone horribly wrong.
3. The Global War on the Internet
As dissidents overthrow their governments in the Middle East and North Africa, you bet that the rest of the world’s governments are watching carefully and learning everything they can from these governments’ failure to hold on to power. What have they learned: that the Internet is the most powerful tool of true patriots and the worst enemy of tyranny, secrecy, and repression. So as Hollywood seeks regulation to protect its profits from the innovations of Silicon Valley, government officials are happy to oblige. Hence, SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, PCIP, and whatever else they can throw at us next. Don’t be fooled into thinking we’ve won after the successful SOPA blackout– the regime in Washington is not going to stop until it has its grimy little hands all over the Internet and the legal and technical infrastructure in place to shut it down if necessary.
4. FEMA Camps Go Live
LewRockwell.com reports:
As many of our readers know, the U.S. Senate recently passed the National Defense Authorization Act, which, it has been argued, authorizes the establishment of domestic war zones and the subsequent detention of those who are suspected of engaging in terrorist-related activity – including, arguably, U.S. citizens. What you may not know, however, is that just days after the passage of the act reports are surfacing that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, under the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security, is requisitioning private contractors to provide services for government, defense & infrastructure pertaining specifically to FEMA activities with respect to emergency services.
At first glance, this may seem like no big deal. Why shouldn’t the government prepare for emergencies?
However, a review of an email made available through Info Wars from Kellogg, Brown & Root Services (KBR), a subsidiary of mega government contractor Haliburton, notes that the contracting opportunities available through the government and KBR are specifically for “temporary camp services and facilities.”
Guess what else:
Additionally, we have learned over the last couple of years that FEMA has requisitioned manufacturers for 140 Million Packets of Food, Blankets, and Body Bags, while the U.S. military is Actively War Gaming ‘Large Scale Economic Breakdown’ and ‘Civil Unrest’ which includes training for over 20,000 US military personnel for contingencies that may include riots and/or mass detentions.
While mainstream media will not report this, and most of the population will either ignore it or chalk it off as being once again blown out of proportion by the alternative news sphere, the evidence is right in front of us – it is overwhelming and very compelling.
Our government is, without a doubt, preparing for an event(s) that will likely result in the mass detentions of tens of thousands of individuals across the entire United States.
5. Drone Warfare
The increased use of drones in warfare by the U.S. Department of Defense is itself an unsettling development in world history and looks to be setting off a “drone arms race” with other world powers. Best case scenario, the ultimate result is “not as horrific” as it could be. But like all other aspects of the war on terror, we are seeing the beginning signs of mission creep as the drones are starting to be employed here in “battlefield America.” Last year America saw the “first known arrests of U.S. citizens with help from a Predator, the spy drone that has helped revolutionize modern warfare.” The report at that link also says: “Local police say they have used two unarmed Predators based at Grand Forks Air Force Base to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since June. The FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration have used Predators for other domestic investigations, officials said.”
One if by land, two if by sea… three if by drone.
6. War Gaming in American Cities
In yet another example of the rapidly blurring lines between home front and battlefield, LAPD and the Pentagon conducted military drills in downtown L.A. this January:
The Los Angeles Police Department teamed with military special operation forces Wednesday evening to conduct multi-agency tactical exercises in the skies above downtown LA.
Many questioned what was going on Wednesday night as a Black Hawk helicopter and four OH-6 choppers – or “Little Birds” – flew over the city, at one point hovering just above the US Bank building downtown and later flying low over the Staples Center as the Lakers played inside.
Someone could be seen sitting inside an open chopper with his legs hanging off the side.
Sky9 spotted the Black Hawk in the dark, making what appeared to be a drop off at a park before quickly ascending back into the air.
Throughout the exercise, the five rotorcrafts were staged at Dodgers Stadium.
The LAPD said the purpose of the training was in part to ensure the military’s ability to operate in urban environments.
…
Similar exercises have been seen in Miami and Boston.
7. Restricted Air Travel
No one in this country likes the TSA, yet it persists in its unconstitutional canvassing of every single U.S. citizen that passes through an airport. If the federal government wants to search a U.S. citizen, the Fourth Amendment requires a warrant from a judge specifically citing the person or place to be searched and the items to be seized. The TSA’s blanket searches do not meet this criteria so they are unconstitutional and illegal. They also haven’t made us more safe. There is as of this writing, no evidence that any terror plot has ever been thwarted by the TSA as it burns through billions in taxpayer dollars and feels up nuns and children passing through airports. The purpose isn’t to keep us safe but to humiliate, demoralize, and habituate us to submitting to the Washington regime’s uniformed agents no matter how illegal, irrational, and abusive their behavior. Meanwhile the no-fly list just keeps growing.
8. Surveillance
Big Brother is watching you closer than ever before:
The Department of Homeland Security has declared its intention to gather personal data on journalists or others who might use “traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.”
New guidelines allow for a broader reach in collecting such personal information than before. Any reporter or broadcaster, from a Fox News anchor to a lowly little blogger angry at the government, could find himself ensnared by DHS’s newest arm of the surveillance state.
Almost seven years ago, it became known that the FBI was monitoring the ACLU and antiwar groups. The institutional paranoia extended to the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, who even made sure to spy on those dangerous terrorists known as Quakers.
With Obama in charge we see the full power of the bipartisan surveillance state—an apparatus that sees any thorn in the side of the regime as a potential threat to national security. The DHS, in particular, has targeted both “rightwing extremists” and peace activists. And of course, everyday Americans are caught up in the dragnet of the NSA’s wiretapping program, itself a huge presidential power grab even compared to the very lax standards that existed under FISA and the Patriot Act.
9. Iran
Iran’s next. The sabre-rattling cannot be mistaken as anything but an overture to war, either overtly, or via Washington’s satellite states like Israel. The deployment to the Middle East of the Navy’s “floating base” which some commentators call “the mothership” is just the latest signal from the Pentagon that war is ahead while commentators in the media ramp up the scare rhetoric over Iran’s nuclear program. The truth is that Iran’s nuclear program does not represent a credible threat to the United States. It is a regional threat and a regional issue for people in the Middle East to deal with. That’s how our Founding Fathers would have it, but as George Orwell so brilliant depicts in his dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, the only way a government can continue waging war against its own people is by waging perpetual war against other nations as a distraction, a means of rallying its citizens victims together, and an excuse for violations of its own citizens’ rights. As Orwell also points out in his narrative, the government is always changing sides and fighting new enemies. Washington’s overt, military attack on Iraq and its impending one on Iran are both the means toward a different end: its covert, economic and legal attack on its own people, their material wealth, and their liberties.
10. We’re All Terrorists Now
With no end in site to the war on terror, you should be frightened to know that you’re a terrorist now. Droves of media commentators as well as top-ranking politicians all the way up to the Vice President have been calling Tea Party activists terrorists for months now; Occupy activists have also been called the T word, as well as– get this– peace activists; the DHS circulated two different memos in 2009 warning that people with the “wrong” kinds of bumper stickers on their vehicles (like anything pro-life, pro-gun, anti-income tax, or even pro-Ron Paul) might be terrorists; if you are missing fingers, the DOJ says you might be a terrorist; if you have weather proofed ammo, you might be a terrorist; if you have more than seven days of food in your home, you might be a terrorist; who knows, you’re probably a suspected terrorist if you read The Silver Underground. The problem is that Washington has made all these special exceptions for its fight against terrorism and now the meaning of that word is rapidly expanding to include just about anybody.
Conclusion
It’s hard to ignore all these signs. It’s hard to see this all happening so fast and at an accelerating rate without connecting the dots and fearing that Washington is making preparations to declare war on the American people. And maybe in addition to scaring us, this should give us hope because it could mean that the government is just as scared of us as we should be of it. It could mean that the establishment is holding its finger to the winds of change and senses something big on the horizon, something it wants to prepare for, something it wants to avert– like a true revolution in how we think and what we believe, a great awakening of the American mind to the racket in Washington and at the Federal Reserve, a major push to reform our government and once again enforce the freedoms that are guaranteed to us by right and by law, the beginnings of real liberty and justice for all, not special privileges and unchecked power for the few.
One way or the other, it’s not hard to see that Washington is getting ready for something…
And don’t forget to visit our official website to learn more about the Silver Circle Movie:http://SilverCircleMovie.com
LA County OKs $1,000 Fine For Throwing Football, Frisbee On Beaches (and digging holes)
Story:
LOS ANGELES (CBS) — When you head down to the beach for a little fun this summer, county officials want you to leave the pigskin at home.
The Board of Supervisors this week agreed to raise fines to up to $1,000 for anyone who throws a football or a Frisbee on any beach in Los Angeles County.
In passing the 37-page ordinance on Tuesday, officials sought to outline responsibilities for law enforcement and other public agencies while also providing clarification on beach-goer activities that could potentially disrupt or even injure the public.
The updated rules now prohibit “any person to cast, toss, throw, kick or roll” any object other than a beach ball or volleyball “upon or over any beach” between Memorial Day and Labor Day.
Exceptions allow for ball-throwing in predesignated areas, when a person obtains a permit, or playing water polo “in or over the Pacific Ocean”.
However, during the winter off-season, the new rules will be relaxed.
Officials warned that any activities that could potentially harm “any person or property on or near the beach” should not be allowed during the peak summer season.
Your kids could also end up costing you big bucks: the ordinance also prohibits digging any hole deeper than 18 inches into the sand except where permission is granted for film and TV production services only.
Philadelphia’s Department of “Pre-Crime”
Google Is Already Using SOPA-Like Censorship
From PrisonPlanet:
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Despite Google’s much-heralded support for the anti-SOPA movement, the web giant is already enforcing SOPA-like policies of its own, blacklisting legitimate websites from its news aggregator and following government orders to remove material from its search results and You Tube.

As major Internet giants joined forces yesterday to protest legislation that would hand the U.S. government power to arbitrarily seize websites with no legal process under the pretext of copyright infringement, Google slapped a black censorship image over its logo and urged people to sign an anti-SOPA petition that has accrued over 5 million signees.
However, Google’s main issue with SOPA is seemingly not related to their concerns about Chinese-style web censorship becoming commonplace, but rather which entity gets to wield those powers – large transnational corporations or governments.
While Google criticizes SOPA publicly, it is already privately using SOPA-like powers to unfairly marginalize legitimate web content.
Google News is a content aggregator that allows users to search thousands of news sources for relevant stories. Although the aggregator includes a plethora of obscure, occasionally offensive, and barely-read websites, in November 2010 Google took the decision to de-list PrisonPlanet.com and Infowars.com from its indexed news sources.
Infowars.com alone is an internationally recognized news website that gets more traffic than MSNBC.com and innumerable other big mainstream news websites. Our articles are routinely featured on the Drudge Report, which itself is renowned as the primary agenda-setting news website in the United States, driving more traffic to individual stories than the likes of Facebook and Twitter combined.
Infowars owner Alex Jones is a nationally syndicated radio host whose broadcast appears on an ever-expanding list of big mainstream radio stations. Jones has been afforded feature profiles by the likes of Rolling Stone Magazine, who acknowledged his role as a pioneer in the media world.
Infowars.com is clearly a legitimate and important news website that features original content which routinely makes an impact and occasionally goes viral. And yet Google de-listed the website from its news aggregator on a whim with no explanation provided. Since Google and its owner Eric Schmidt are prominent financial contributors to the Obama campaign, we can only assume we were blacklisted for political reasons.
Whether you concur with our political stance or are rapidly against it, what can’t be argued is that we are a legitimate news outfit – but Google has arbitrarily banned us from appearing on their ‘news’ search results.
This is a clear example of how Google is already enforcing SOPA-like rules of its own choosing, without the need for any law to be passed by any legislative body.
In addition, while concerns rage about the state obtaining the power to shut down websites and remove web content with no recourse, Google is already following orders from the federal government in the majority of cases in removing videos from its You Tube platform, including takedowns on the grounds that the videos contain “government criticism”.
Google-owned You Tube has complied with thousands of requests worldwide to remove political protest videos that are clearly not in violation of any copyright or national security interests and do not constitute defamation.
The number of takedown orders received by Google from authorities based in the United States rose dramatically over the past year, with demands to remove information increasing by 70 per cent. Google complied in removing the material in 63% of the cases.
One such example was You Tube’s compliance with a request from the British government to censor footage of the British Constitution Group’s Lawful Rebellion protest, during which they attempted to civilly arrest Judge Michael Peake at Birkenhead county court.
Google has also targeted our own You Tube channel for termination on numerous occasions merely for posting legitimate news content, such as the Wikileaks Apache helicopter footage, which appears on hundreds of other You Tube channels.
Crucially, Google has for years censored its own search results subject to the mandates of different governments across the world. SOPA and PIPA are merely an effort to codify into US law what is already taking place in more authoritarian countries, with the willing participation of Google itself.
Many other web giants are also moving to censor the Internet, including VeriSign, who recently demanded the power to terminate websites deemed “abusive” with no legal oversight whatsoever.
Public wi-fi systems stationed in airports, train stations, libraries, schools, and workplaces also routinely censor political websites.
Who needs government to censor the Internet when large corporations are already doing it? Amidst all the anti-SOPA rage, we should not be so naive as to give the likes of Google a pass when considering the totality of threats posed to free speech on the world wide web.
We encourage people to at least be aware of alternatives to Google, search websites that will not enact SOPA-like censorship policies, such as StartPage.com. Watch a video below from November 2010 in which Alex Jones explains how Google is censoring the web – without the need for SOPA.
Ron Paul Introduces Legislation to Overturn the NDAA
New Federal Moves to Restrict Gun Sales
From TeaPartyEconomist:
The federal government is now tracking gun sales through added paperwork. One gun store resisted. It filed a lawsuit to resist. A judge has thrown out the case.
The rules affect pretty much any firearm that is not a handgun. That includes hunting rifles, semi-automatics, those with detachable magazines and any caliber .22 or higher.
Under the rules states bordering Mexico, like Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico, stores must report anyone who buys two or more of those guns in a five day span to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Friday a federal judge ruled the Obama rules can stay. Some say it’s a blow to store owners and the nation’s second amendment rights. The NRA is working on appealing that ruling saying tracking those following the rules is pointless.
“Our current laws need to be enforced, and our current laws are adequate,” Arulanandam said. “What they’re doing is burdening law abiding retailers, and this will eventually put the burden on all law abiding gun owners.”
Retailers also say they take every precaution when selling guns, including the government mandated background checks.
“We are actually more stringent than what the law requires,” Ryan Burt the CEO of Calibers Shooting Range said. “We go above and beyond, and that’s on purpose because we want to keep our clientele at a certain level.”
What is the government’s motivation? Covering up its own mess.
The NRA believes the increased regulations are in place because of the government’s failed Fast and Furious gunrunning operation.
The government argues that about 80 percent of the guns used in criminal activity by the cartels come from mom and pop gun shops in the border states like New Mexico.
So, the noose tightens.
Continue Reading on www.kasa.com

