The Patriot Act IP Act gives the government the power to seize websites easily. Many law professors say that the new legislation can allow states to end sites for just linking to other sites that have copyrighted material. This is a part of new legislation that can target web domain without oversight for just linking to sites that host copyright material. This act is related to repressive regime. Law professors believe that the bill allows the state to break the Internet addressing system. This bill is called the Protect IP bill. It’s now stalled in the Senate. It can end Internet freedom as we know it. It can make the website to censor and delete material when requested to by government or corporations (and shut down user channels without recourse that is done by YouTube). This proposal is done now by Homeland Security when the DHS shut down over 70 websites without any form of legal proceedings (and in some cases without even notifying the owners). There is an open letter penned by Professor Mark Lemley of Stanford University, David S. Levine of Elon University and David G. Post of Temple University. The letter makes the case that the bill will force Internet hosting companies and search engines to de list entire websites on the basis of a mere copyright claim by a copyright holder without independent or legal process undertaken. The bill could even make linking to a website as a violation of intellectual property laws plus possibly make criminal penalties. “At a time when many foreign governments have dramatically stepped up their efforts to censor Internet communications, the [Protect IP Act] would incorporate into U.S. law — for the first time — a principle more closely associated with those repressive regimes: a right to insist on the removal of content from the global Internet, regardless of where it may have originated or be located, in service of the exigencies of domestic law,” states the letter. The professors are right that removing websites without oversight is a clear violation of constitutional law as interpreted by the Supreme Court. The bill makes Internet service providers and operators of Internet to refuse to recognize Internet domains if the court finds that it are dedicated to infringing activities. Although instead of wait until a website is actually judged infringing before imposing the equivalent of an Internet death penalty, the Act would make the court to order any Internet service provider to stop recognizing the site even on a temporary restraining order (or preliminary injunction issued the same day the complaint is filed). Advertisers and credit card companies will find difficulty to do business on the Internet. The reason is that search engines, credit card companies and even advertisers would be forced to refuse to deal with the owners of the site under the proposed law. Web regulation has been promoted by Senator Joe Lieberman. Lieberman even wanted to have a Communist Chinese style system of Internet policing that can give the President the power to block entire areas of the web with a figurative kill switch. Amazon’s Cloud networked deleted all of the Wiki leaks website from its servers following a phone call made by Senator Joe Lieberman’s Senate Homeland Security Committee demanding the website be axed. Lieberman admitted that his reason for promoting Internet censorship is that: “…Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too.” He denies that he wants to have an Internet kill switch as misinformation, but he said that he wants the U.S. government to disconnect parts of the Internet in case of war. China doesn’t just disconnect the Internet in case of war. It censors and intimidates people all of the time if they express dissent against governmental corruption or atrocities. The West wants these anti-Internet policies since the Internet is one of the last bastions of true free speech. One of the memos of the counterintelligence program of the FBI dated August 25, 1967. It actually said that "…no political activist or somebody with an ideology that was perceived as a threat to the establishment should have access to a mass communication media." So, J. Edgar Hoover hated anybody trying to stand up against the agenda of the establishment.
The Knights Templar’s history deals with rumors about the Baphomet. The Baphomet as researchers prove deals with dualism in society. This means that in the occultist’s mind, the Universe is filled with opposites (like dark and light, good and evil, male and female, etc.), so to have dualism manifests into equilibrium or natural completion. People have accused the Knights Templar of using Baphomet in their rituals. In 1098, the crusader Anslem of Ribemont wrote about the Baphomet that the Templars prayed to. The Templars admitted under torture and interrogation that they praised the Baphomet during the trials of 1307 (under the request of King Philip IV of France). Some describe the Baphomet of a severed head, a cat, or a head with 3 faces. Other Templars denied the existence of Baphomet. Many accusations against the Templars were fabricated and some were factual. Occultists from the 1400’s onward believe that the Templars worshipped the Baphomet image.
Sociology naturally deals with controversial issues. One such issue is affirmative action. It was controversial when I was growing up in the 1990’s and it’s controversial now. The reality is that reactionaries don’t know that much about what affirmative action is all about. Programs to help citizens receive opportunities from the Homestead Act to the G.I. Bill have manifested in American history not out of a product of some quota, but to stabilize the essence of American cultural ingenuity. According to a national study by the GAO (or the General Accounting Office), there is information about scholarships. The information reads that less than 4 percent of scholarship money in America is represented by awards that consider race as a factor. According to the study only 0.25 percent or ¼ of 1 percent of all undergrad scholarship dollars come from awards that are restricted to person of color alone. Therefore, many people who aren’t of color can have 99.75 percent of all scholarship funds out there for college. This study was made in the mid 1990’s and the numbers might be less since today, there is an extreme, silly, and abhorrent backlash to affirmative action. Tons of people color doesn’t receive the benefits of race based scholarships. Only 3.5 percent of college students receive any scholarship even partly based on race (receiving a small part of the financial aid picture). So, minority scholarships have little influence in the total realm of higher education finance, yet reactionaries want it all gone. These scholarships for minorities are used to fight against racism and other issues in America not to promote tensions. Programs for the poor in lower socio-economic backgrounds from the Appalachian mountain region and other places are fine too in giving them hope and an opportunities to improve their basic standard of living. There are still issues of class and race in America that we need to get solved. Therefore, discussions of these issues are necessary in order to end obstacles based on race (for racism can psychologically harm students even now if it’s not fought against correctly) and class. It’s truly obvious that we need compassion in terms of welfare programs, our immigration issues solved rationally, and affirmatively giving opportunities to human beings. Pell Grants and government subsidies for higher education are key ways to assist low and middle income Americans as well. Socioeconomic diversity in universities is a plus to develop the basic student composition. Tim Wise is correct to point out that schools can add class to considerations to admission along with race. This can transpire the recognizing of obstacles faced by people of color, those from across the socioeconomic scale, and give additional opportunities to economically struggling white people. Such a supplemental approach would, according to Espenshade and Radford, substantially boost the numbers of low income white students on elite campuses, and would even provide a modest bump in the numbers of people of color on campus. My views are controversial and you don’t have to agree with me of course.
It’s easy to see that America’s recent wars have developed by falsehoods. Even NATO’s campaign in Libya was done by deception. It’s a costly war. Congress is increasingly opposed to the effort. Defense Secretary Gates in Brussels wants more European involvement in the war or the alliance will fail in the war effort. Gates wanted more funds in the Libyan operations, but the White House refuses to go along with his proposals. PR campaigns were crucial to get wars starting within America and other nations. One example was that in 1990, Colin Powell (or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) was showing doubts about whether America should attack Kuwait. There was a satellite that shown photos of Saddam amassing 265,000 troops and 1,500 tanks at the edge of the Saudi Arabian border. Later, Powell changed his mind and the attack came about. Yet, the St. Petersburg Times viewed satellite photos from a commercial satellite and saw no sign of a quarter of a million troops or their tanks. There were hawks in Congress like Tom Lantos and Stephen Solarz that made support for the attack on Iraq. There was a story from a 15 year old girl. She had seen Kuwaiti infants snatched from their incubators by Iraqi soldiers. The story was discredited. The reason is that the girl was a daughter of the Saudi ambassador in Washington, D.C. and might not have visited the hospital at all. She had been prepped on her story by the p.r. firm Hill and Knowlton. It has a contract for $11.5 million from the Kuwaiti government. Other U.S. foreign interventions are found with false stories. There was the “Remember the Maine” story from the Hearst press in 1898, false stories of a North Vietnamese attack on U.S. destroyers in the 2nd Tonkin Gulf incident of August 4, 1964, etc. Even new documents found show that in Operation Northwoods, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff back in 1962 wanted a series of lethal attacks in America to deceive Americans in order to have a war against Cuba. Phony stories dealt with the Persian Gulf battles from 1990-1991. There was the forged yellowcake documents from Italy that contributed to Bush’s war in 2003. Bush listed this information in his 2003 State of the Union address. There were false stories that tried to link Saddam to the anthrax letters in 2001 when the anthrax came from an U.S. biowarfare laboratory. Gaddafi’s army accused of rape have either yet to be proven or are disproven. These charges were made on June 8 by Luis Moreno-Ocampo, chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), who claimed Gaddafi ordered the rape of hundreds of women during his crackdown of people (and use soldiers with Viagra to form more attacks). Susan Rice or the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. repeated these charges from Moreno. No conclusive evidence has been proven about these accusations. The rapes haven’t been shown in a massive level amidst the accusations. According to Time, the rape stories are being circulated by doctors who claim to have met and treated patients but do not have patients’ permission to reveal their identities. Earlier, according to a Libyan doctor interviewed in an Al Jazeera video, “many doctors have found Viagra and condoms in the pockets of dead pro-Gaddafi fighters, as well as treated female rape survivors. The doctor insists this clearly indicates the Gaddafi regime is using rape as a weapon of war.” There is no evidence that Gaddafi raped anyone as Moreno claimed. Real rape victims are in Libya though, so I want to make that clear. Even the U.N. human rights investigator Cherif Bassiouni told Agence France Presse that the rape and Viagra are promoted by the Benghazi authorities to have massive hysteria. He found only 3 rape cases. Cynthia McKinney is a former U.S. Congresswoman. She found in his investigative mission that to date that one army known to show Viagra in war operations is the U.S. Army. They did this to bribe information from aging tribal leaders in Afghanistan. So, deception is found in numerous wars spanning eons of time.
Prochoiceviolence.com documents violence by abortion supporters and practitioners. Many Pro-Life people have been suffered by illegal and harassing by abortion supporters. HFI staffer Dr. Brian Clowes is the director of research for the pro-life group. He’s the lead researcher for HLI’s “Pro-Choice Violence” project. The website has done extensive research on the surprising amount of violence perpetrated by abortion practitioners and the proponents of abortion compared to the relatively few violent crimes done by pro-life advocates. The mainstream media rarely (if ever) reports on the violence inflicted on pro-life human beings. Pro-Life people ought to learn the truth about how peaceful their movement is. New crimes all of the time are done by abortionists and those who defend people destroying innocent human life. Clowes wants the website to change the national narrative and stereotype of pro-life advocates of people collectively engaging in abortion related violence. The story is that most Pro-Lifers are peaceful and express their views in a non-abusive way. Much news has fabricated crimes about abortion refuse to cover real crimes done by those who either perform abortions or use violence to intimidate pro-lifers. Clowes is also quick to not castigate all abortion supporters as people who engage in violence and harassment in illegal activities. “While most pro-choice activists would not participate in such attacks, the fact that they go ignored by the media actually encourages those whose support for the violence of abortion translates into violence against those who would defend an unborn child’s right to life,” he says. The website shows many sharable documents. Each one deals with the phenomenon of pro-abortion violence. It shows more videos that show pro-lifers being abused or attacked for their views. The information in the site is graphic because of the severity of the actions. The main body of the site shows state by state and city by city listing of more than 11,000 documented incidents of pro-abortion violence (including mass murder, rape, arson, cannibalism, kidnapping and maiming to cheating in sports events, animal neglect and cruelty, indecent exposure, child sexual molestation and bank robbery). Other sources back up this law breaking. There is a spreadsheet proving the violence. A list of hundreds of women killed by abortions acuminate in the website. A PowerPoint document is used for presentation and summaries of pregnant women killed by boyfriends or husbands because the women refused to get abortions. Pro-abortion people have done more than 300 murders since Roe V. Wade and 192 murders just since 2000. Most of these murders were done against women who refuse to have abortions. The abortion industry involves killed. There are at least 550 botched abortions fatally done by abortionists. The pro-abortion movement is responsible for more than 850 deaths since Roe v. Wade. In fact, “pro choicers” have averaged more murders per year since 1985 than supposed “pro lifers” have in the history of the entire conflict over abortion. Mehradad Aalai, Theresa Zumwalt, and other abortionists have done heinous crimes as well. The cover up of child molestation by abortionists is shown too. Chicago abortionists Henry Howard Holmes killed more than 50 people by slowly burning them to death and dissolving them in acid. Marquis de Sade promoted torture and murder of pregnant women. He wanted the legalization of abortion in France more than 200 years ago. Jim Poillon was one Pro-Life man that was killed by a pro-abortion radical.
By Timothy
No comments:
Post a Comment