Category: Corruption Corner

Bruce Schneier Removed from Invitee List for Congressional Hearing on the TSA

If this doesn’t reek of corruption and demonstrate how false democracy really is nothing will. Congress is holding a hearing on the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) naked body scanners. At first they invited security expert, and major critic of the TSA, Bruce Schneier but later told him not to come:

On Friday, at the request of the TSA, I was removed from the witness list. The excuse was that I am involved in a lawsuit against the TSA, trying to get them to suspend their full-body scanner program. But it’s pretty clear that the TSA is afraid of public testimony on the topic, and especially of being challenged in front of Congress. They want to control the story, and it’s easier for them to do that if I’m not sitting next to them pointing out all the holes in their position. Unfortunately, the committee went along with them. (They tried to pull the same thing last year and it failed — video at the 10:50 mark.)

The claim that he was removed for his involvment in an ongoing lawsuit is nothing more than a convenient excuse. In all likelihood he was removed because Congress doesn’t want to hear any criticisms on the body scanners as they’re very useful for our trip down the road to fascism. There is too much money involved in the body scanners for them to ever go away, in fact they only thing we’re likely to see is an expansion of their use at locations beyond airports. Let’s also not forget the fact that the body scanners are worthless.

If You Disobey You Will Be Put in a Cage

Periodically I bring up the state’s obsession with using violence to enforce its decrees. Many people seem to believe fines aren’t examples of state violence but they never stop to think about the reason people pay fines. You pay a fine because of the implicit threat: if you don’t pay the fine you will be kidnapped and held in a cage. Many Americans have been held in cages for incredibly stupid reasons. A stupid reason we can add to the list is not siding a house:

A Burnsville man on his way to work was arrested and thrown in jail without bond, and then subjected to electronic home monitoring.

But it wasn’t for drugs or a DWI or some other major crime.

Burnsville city leaders say Mitch Faber’s dealings with the law all stem from his failure to properly put up siding on his house.

Yep, siding.

Faber says he had every intention of completing the stucco and decorative rock project on his home but he ran into money troubles when the economy soured. Burnsville leaders say they had no choice to enforce the law.

Here’s how a simple code violation spiraled into a criminal case:

Mitch and his wife Jean say it all began back in 2007 when they received a letter from the city of Burnsville saying, in part, “you must complete the siding of your home.”

“We were in the process of finishing,” Mitch insists. “This wasn’t something that we were trying to avoid doing.”

But in 2009 there were two more warning letters, and in 2010 yet another–this time requiring Faber to appear in court. Burnsville leaders provided 5 Eyewitness News with these 2010 photos of the Fabers’ home as proof there was a problem.

“I was expecting maybe a $700 fine,” Faber said. Instead he was given an ultimatum — finish the siding or go to jail.

[…]

After two days locked up, a judge agreed Mitch should be released but required him to submit to electronic home monitoring. In Dakota County, that process requires participants — no matter what their crimes — to blow into a drug and alcohol device every time an alarm goes off.

“They could call me at 2 in the morning and they did,” Faber said.

The state didn’t even get to the part where they threaten to kidnap Mitch unless he paid an extortion fee, they just went straight to the kidnapping part. In essence Mitch is being punished for not having enough money. He began stuccoing his home but didn’t have the money to complete the upgrade. Here’s the thing, it’s Mitch’s home so why the fuck should the state be able to tell him what to do with it? Perhaps he wanted a home that had unfinished stucco siding, then what? Too bad? Finish the siding, do with your home what you do not wish to do, or be held in a cage?

My question is this: where is the victim of this supposed crime and what harm do they claim has been done to them? Without a victim claiming harm there is no ground for punishment in my opinion. In this case the state has demonstrated their willingness to bring violence where no violence previously existed. Nobody was harmed by Mitch’s home not being fully stuccoed yet he was kidnapped.

This is yet another example of the police state we live in.

This is Why I Don’t Call it a Justice System

Calling the system of laws in this country a justice system is entirely erroneous. What was have is a punishment system, a system that punishes you whether or not you’re guilty or innocent. Things have only been going down hill and now the state is so brazen that they have flat out stated being proven innocent is no longer valid ground for release:

Witnesses have testified that another man confessed to Deputy Hill’s murder. But in a January ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Keith Ellison lamented that even though he was concerned Will could be innocent, he had to deny his motion for a new trial.

“The questions raised during post-judgment factual development about Will’s actual innocence create disturbing uncertainties,” he wrote. “Federal law does not recognize actual innocence as a mechanism to overturn an otherwise valid conviction.”

Emphasis mine. Actual innocent isn’t recognized by federal law as a mechanism to have a conviction overturned? What? Isn’t that the entire fucking point of the “justice” system, determine whether or not somebody is actually guilty of a crime? I know the motto is “innocent until proven guilty” but if a person who was previous ruled guilty is later found to be innocent doesn’t that indicate they’re no longer proven guilty? Isn’t the “justice” system only supposed to punish the guilty?

Let’s face it, we’re in a police state and justice was given the boot ages ago.

Privileges of Authority

As I always say there are two sets of rules; one that applies to the rule makers and another that applies to us mere peasants. Another way of putting this is when you give a group a monopoly on the making and enforcing of laws they will be sure to exempt themselves from said laws:

SAINT PAUL, Minn. — State lawmakers are subject to the the laws they make, with one surprising exception. They can’t be arrested for a misdemeanor during the session.

“Every time we talk to legislators about this they pull out their card and tell us, ‘Oh, you’re talking about this card’?” Jayne Jones, a Concordia University adjunct professor, told KARE.

The card, issued to all 201 legislators, and signed by the Secretary of State, certifies that the lawmaker carrying it is entitled to privileges stated on the back of the card. The back quotes Article IV, Section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution.

“PRIVILEGE FROM ARREST. The members of each house in all cases except treason, felony and breach of the peace, shall be privileged from arrest during the session of their respective houses and in going to or returning from the same.”

Legislators in Minnesota have given themselves immunity from law for the length of their session. If a “representative” is drunk off his ass, gets in his car, and drives home he’s has immunity. Such exemptions require participation by two entities, the legislators that make the rules and the officers who enforce the rules. In the case of a drunk legislator driving home it’s in the police’s best interest to be an obedient dog of the state instead of keeping people safe since arresting a legislator during his or her session will lead to termination of the office.

I guess it’s easier to make laws when you’re basically immune to them.

The People’s Paradise

It’s a good thing China adopted socialism so they don’t have a governing body made up of millionaire bourgeoisie, wait a minute:

The richest 70 members of China’s legislature added more to their wealth last year than the combined net worth of all 535 members of the U.S. Congress, the president and his Cabinet, and the nine Supreme Court justices.

The net worth of the 70 richest delegates in China’s National People’s Congress, which opens its annual session on March 5, rose to 565.8 billion yuan ($89.8 billion) in 2011, a gain of $11.5 billion from 2010, according to figures from the Hurun Report, which tracks the country’s wealthy. That compares to the $7.5 billion net worth of all 660 top officials in the three branches of the U.S. government.

The income gain by NPC members reflects the imbalances in economic growth in China, where per capita annual income in 2010 was $2,425, less than in Belarus and a fraction of the $37,527 in the U.S. The disparity points to the challenges that China’s new generation of leaders, to be named this year, faces in countering a rise in social unrest fueled by illegal land grabs and corruption.

I guess the proletariat didn’t revolt hard enough.

Bad Incentives

Whenever the government gives away free stuff, no matter who they’re giving it to, it leads to bad incentives:

The cost of free and reduced-price lunch programs is entirely covered by federal funding, which means that increases in the use of the program do not directly impact District 196’s finances. But the district is affected in other ways, Olson and Knight said.

District officials have put more energy and resources into encouraging families to apply for the free and reduced-price lunch program, and sending out notices in a variety of publications and online media, Olson and Knight said. The district also has a breakfast program that is well-attended by free and reduced lunch enrollees.

While the article makes claims that the number of families enrolled in the reduced-price lunch program is a good indicator of economic turmoil I think they failed to consider the interests of the schools. When a school gets a family on reduced-price lunch they no longer have to foot the bill for that lunch, therefore it’s in their best interest to get as many families on reduced-price lunch as possible so they can pocket more money.

It’s easy to see why every school would attempt to push every family onto the reduced-price lunch program, it means more money that can be stuffed into the pockets of the already well paid administrators.

They Keystone Pipeline

A rather controversial topic I’ve not chimed in on so far is the construction of the Keystone Pipeline. For those unaware, the Keystone Pipeline is a large pipeline that would transport oil from the tar sands of Canada to refineries in the United States. The environmentalists oppose it and those hoping for cheaper case support it. Sadly a fact that seems to get less air time is the fact that this pipeline requires the theft of private property through eminent domain:

In 2007 TransCanada’s agents at Universal Field Services approached Randy Thompson, 64, of Martell, NE, asking to survey his farm land. Thompson assented at first, under the assumption that he’d have final say over whether a Canadian company would be allowed to build anything on his property.

“Once I found out a little bit more about what was going on, I rescinded that permission,” Thompson told TPM by phone on Sunday. “[W]e did meet with them once, maybe a couple times. We told them, you don’t have a permit yet, so we absolutely do not want this thing on our property. So until you actually get a permit we have no reason to have any further discussion about this. They continually called me, like once a month or whenever they felt like it. Kept the pressure on us. Made us an offer, $9000. Whatever the offer was, we just don’t want the damn thing on our property.”

That’s when TransCanada really stepped up the pressure.

“In July 2010, we got a written letter from TransCanada, they told us if you don’t accept this within 30 days, we’re going to immediately start eminent domain proceedings against you,” Thompson said. “They didn’t say anything about a permit. I tried to contact the Governor’s office. All I got back was a form letter talking about the pipeline.”

And there lies to true problem with this pipeline, as currently planned it can only be built by using the government’s gun to forcefully steal land from rightful property owners. Eminent domain is a terrible concept that states nobody within the United States (or any of the other nations that have the same laws, which is most of them) can actually own property, instead you may only lease it from the state for as much time as they deem appropriate.

When I bring this up people will often state that eminent domain is OK because the state is required to pay you “just compensation” for any seized property. This argument forgets the fact that value is a subjective term. While a piece of property may only be valued at $100,000 by surveyors it may command a far higher value to a person whose family has been in possession of the property for multiple generations. Determination of value requires two parties: one who is attempting to buy the property and one who is selling the property. The value of the property is that which is agreeable to both parties. This is true of any voluntary transaction, but the state doesn’t deal in voluntary transactions.

If the state wants your land they declare a value, cut you a check for the value they determine, and forcefully remove you from the property if you don’t agree with the states assessment. Eminent domain is theft, period. TransCanada has no right to use the state to forcefully take what isn’t theirs, they need to either give the current owner what is being demanded or go with another plan.

Sadly the state is all too happy to loan it’s capacity for violence to a high bidder like TransCanada and that fact demonstrates the lack of property rights in this country. Without absolute property rights no true freedom can exist.

This pipeline should be condemned to the depths of Hel.

Constitution Free Zones

We’re all aware of so-called gun free zones, places in the United States where it is verboten for law abiding people to carry firearms. Most readers of this blog are likely aware of the so-called Constitution free zones, the areas of the country within 100 miles of the border that the government have claimed fall outside of Constitutional protections. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has put together a rather frightening map that displays the areas of America where the Constitution apparently doesn’t apply:

Using data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the ACLU has determined that nearly 2/3 of the entire US population (197.4 million people) live within 100 miles of the US land and coastal borders.

The government is assuming extraordinary powers to stop and search individuals within this zone. This is not just about the border: This ” Constitution-Free Zone” includes most of the nation’s largest metropolitan areas.

Ever wonder why they only made it 100 miles? Because that covers a majority of the population and as far as the state is concerned that’s good enough for now. Personally I don’t buy the bullshit idea of a Constitution free zone, nowhere in the document does it state that it ceases to apply within 100 miles of the borders and I’m pretty sure the founders would have put something that important somewhere in writing.

America: land of the free so long as you live 100 miles or more inland.

The Fifth Amendment has Been Buried

Last month I reported about a judge who ordered a woman to decrypt here laptop and in doing so violated her Fifth Amendment right. The decision was appealed but the state is usually very consistent in violating rights so the order to decrypt the laptop was upheld:

Colorado federal authorities seized the encrypted Toshiba laptop from defendant Ramona Fricosu in 2010 with valid court warrants while investigating alleged mortgage fraud, and demanded she decrypt it by typing in her password. In January, U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn ordered the woman, who faces decades in prison if convicted, to decrypt the laptop by the end of February.

Her attorney appealed, hoping to win a reprieve based on the assertion that being forced to decrypt her laptop amounts to a breach of the woman’s Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, however, sided with the government’s contention that an appeal was not ripe — that she must be convicted or acquitted before the circuit court would entertain an appeal. Appellate courts usually frown on hearing appeals until after there’s been a verdict.

The appellate court wrote (.pdf) Wednesday that it lacks “jurisdiction to consider the resulting proceeding under any exception to our usual finality rules.”

In other words the woman is in a catch-22 situation, the 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals doesn’t want to make any ruling until after the case has concluded and the woman doesn’t want to decrypt her laptop meaning the case won’t conclude. If there is incriminating evidence on the laptop the woman should not be forced to decrypt the drive because doing so is self-incrimination. Unfortunately, according to the state, that’s irrelevant and she must possible incriminate herself in order to seek protection against self-incrimination.

The Fifth Amendment dies in the first ruling but it was buried by this most recent decision.