Shut Up Slave – Page 61 – A Geek With Guns

Be Careful When You Vote, You Never Know When the Rules Will Change

Voting can be a dangerous activity. Not only are the chances of dying on the way to the polling place greater than actually changing anything with your vote but the rules can chance at a moment’s notice. Take this woman for example, she was convicted of a nonviolent drug offense. She was told that her voting privileges would be restored after she served her probation. But then the rules changed in 2011 and she faced the possibility of more time in a cage:

Two months after I cast my ballot as a civics lesson for my daughter, the Iowa Department of Criminal Investigation agents parked across the street from my house, questioned me, and eventually arrested me and charged me with voter fraud.

Let me explain: When I was convicted on a nonviolent drug charge in 2008, my defense attorney told me that once I served my probation, I would regain my right to vote automatically – correct information at the time. But Gov. Terry Branstad suddenly changed the rules in 2011, and now all citizens with a felony conviction lose their voting rights for life. Our Secretary of State Matt Schultz, in fact, has made this subversion of democracy a point of pride. He has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars hunting down and prosecuting people with past convictions who unknowingly registered or cast a vote.

Luckily for her the jury utilized its right of nullification and acquitted her. But they very well could have convicted her. So the moral of the story is that the rules of voting (and anything involved the state in general) are made up and what you’ve been told by a defense attorney doesn’t matter.

Shut Up, Slaves

It looks like British rulers are tired of hearing criticisms and have thus begun working on crushing free speech, at least from a legal point of view:

Nearly 350 years after us Brits abolished the licensing of the press, whereby every publisher had to get the blessing of the government before he could press and promote his ideas, a new system of licensing is being proposed. And it’s one which, incredibly, is even more tyrannical than yesteryear’s press licensing since it would extend to individuals, too, potentially forbidding ordinary citizens from opening their gobs in public without officialdom’s say-so.

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

[…]

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

There’s a reason George Orwell’s 1984 takes place in Britain, it really is the prototype police state for western civilization. It’s interesting to see a British politician take such an overt stance on destroying free speech. Most British politicians that I’ve heard anything about, much like the politicians here in the United States, at least pay lip service to free speech.

What’s laughable about this idea is that censoring speech is impossible. Thanks to the Internet a person can post material anonymously. We know this because people in tightly control countries such as China and Thailand have continued to post criticisms of the regimes of those countries without getting crushed (in all fairness some of them do get crushed but that’s what happens when you fail to properly utilize the tools available to you).

People wanting to post “extremist” speech in Britain will continue to do so. The only difference is that a few people of lukewarm intelligence that post “extremist speech” will get arrested and made an example of (and being individuals of lukewarm intelligence they will probably be unable to actually go through with any “extremist” plans they post about).

Arnold Abbott Arrested Again for Feeding the Homeless

The government of Fort Lauderdale, Florida really hates homeless people. In fact it hates them so much that it recently passed a law aimed at preventing people from feeding the homeless. Arnold Abbott and a few of his friends decided to keep feeding them in spite of the law and were actually arrested by, what I imagine are, the biggest assholes to ever become police officers (seriously, if you’re a police officer and you’re arresting people for feeding the homeless then you are part of the problem). The city cited Mr. Abbott and he decided to give them a rightly deserved middle finger by continuing on his mission to make the lives of homeless individuals slightly better. Needless to say he was arrested again:

Arnold Abbott, the 90-year-old advocate for the homeless who was issued a citation earlier this week for feeding the homeless without adhering to new rules that would require him to obtain a permit and provide portable toilets, was cited again Wednesday night for the same reason.

This is an example of civil disobedience done right. An erroneous law was passed because a city government believes that the best way to deal with the homeless is to make their lives more miserable so they mosey on to the next city. To demonstrate how shitty the law is people have decided to publicly disobey it, which requires the police and city government to either demonstrates the fact that they’re raging asshole or back down.

The people of Fort Lauderdale would be right if they decided to arrest and detain both the members of the city government and the police for their attempts at restricting voluntary association.

Minneapolis Decided It Had Too Much Democracy

While I didn’t pay much attention to the election results I was curious what Minneapolis’s attitude towards democracy ended up being. As it turns out the denizens of Minneapolis that decided to vote also decided that the city simply had too much democracy:

The city’s previous election filing fee was set at $20. The city will now require a $500 fee to run for mayor, $250 for the Board of Estimate and Taxation, $100 for the Park and Recreation Board. State law also allows candidates to gather signatures instead of paying the fee.

Talk about irony. Minneapolis, in general, is a bastion of neoliberalism. Neoliberals, again in general, spend a lot of time talking about the greatness of democracy, the need for people to go out and vote, and that the political process is where the little guy’s voice can truly be heard. But their actions betray their true beliefs.

Democracy is only great so long as there isn’t too much of it. Last year there were 35 mayoral candidates in Minneapolis, which irritated many neoliberals (and neocons) who worried that some of the candidates not endorsed by a major party would siphon precious votes away from their desired master. And they complained that having so much democracy on the ballot made it confusing for voters who, apparently, are too stupid to find the name of their desired master on a list containing more than two or three candidates. So the list had to be better curtailed to ensure no pesky poor people managed to get on it.

Of course curtailed lists are the cornerstone of voting. Voting is so awesome in the eyes of neoliberals that they get their panties in a bunch whenever somebody says they’re not going to vote. Some of them even claim that it’s one’s civic duty (as if such a thing actually existed) to vote. But they only want a very small list of options available to voters less they mistakenly choose the wrong candidate. Again, voters are too stupid to select the right master unless handed a very small list of potential options.

And what about the little guy’s voice? So long as the little guy can cough up $500 or take enough time off of his job to get the requisite number of signatures his voice can be heard. However if he’s too poor to afford the filing fee and working too much to afford the time to get signatures his voice won’t be heard. Too bad poor people, I guess you should have been wealthier if you wanted to rule.

I don’t live in Minneapolis so I couldn’t have voted on this measure if I wanted to nor could I run for mayor. So these results don’t impact me in any way. But it does show the level of hypocrisy neoliberals hold in regards to their precious god of democracy. That, to me, is amusing.

Controlling the Message

When the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) declared Ferguson, Missouri a no-fly zone I immediately thought it did so to suppress media coverage of police brutality. I’m cynical by nature so it’s nice to be surprised once in a while. But this isn’t one of those cases:

The FAA records official phone conversations at its air traffic facilities, a policy that is known to employees. The initial flight restrictions hindered planes from landing at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport unless they violated the no-fly order. The recordings show FAA officials seeking police agreement the next morning to change the designation of the restricted area to allow air traffic into Lambert and then struggling with the wording of the no-fly order in an effort to prevent media from entering of the restricted area.

[…]

Second Kansas City manager: “I went into the system and picked law enforcement … and of course it puts the one in that says nobody can be in there except the relief aircraft. …

Unidentified FAA employee: “Now what’s relief aircraft? …”

Manager: “It’s whoever the police want in there at that point when it’s a law enforcement one. The problem is, this is a very unusual situation … because normally these are, you know, a mile (radius) and 1,000 feet (in altitude), you know, to keep media out …”

FAA employee: “Hang on. Why are we even having that? Because, I mean, if it’s just for media, like you said, then why is it so big? And, otherwise, we thought that it might’ve been for them trying to take pot shots at somebody. You know anything about that or anything?”

Manager: “I was talking to Jim, the FLM (front-line manager) in the tower, and I was talking to Chris at St. Louis County Police. The commander at St. Louis County wanted 3 (nautical) miles and 8,000 feet and I talked him down to 3 and 5. They finally admitted it really was to keep the media out … but they were a little concerned of, obviously, anything else that could be going on.”

Manager, later in the same conversation: “I’d like you to talk to the tower and get the coordination going again with the police department. They did not care if you ran commercial traffic through this TFR (temporary flight restriction) all day long. They didn’t want media in there. … There’s no option for a TFR that says, you know, ‘OK, everybody but the media is OK.'”

This shouldn’t surprise anybody considering all of the other ways police in Ferguson were abusing reporters. It should, however, make you upset because it shows yet again how corrupt modern policing is and how little the so-called freedom of the press matters. As with most cases of police corruption the likely outcome of this mess will go without consequences for the police who were suppressing news coverage.

Representative Mike Rogers Wants Edward Snowden Charged With Murder

When you find out that you government is doing something unlawful and tell the world in the hopes of getting it to change its behavior what do you end up getting? If you said deserved reward for uncovering unlawful activity you are incorrect. If you said being accused of murder by a Congress critter you are correct:

Republican Mike Rogers, the chairman of the House of Representatives intelligence committee, told an meeting in the House of Commons in London on Tuesday evening that Snowden was a “traitor” who was now living in the “loving arms” of Russian spies.

“The [US] government has pressed charges on Mr Snowden,” he said. “We are treating him, as I would argue, the traitor that he is.” Rogers added: “And by the way, and this is important, I would charge him for murder.”

“He took information that allows force protection, not only for British soldiers, but for US soldiers, and made it more difficult for us to track those activities. Meaning it is more likely that one of those soldiers is going to get their legs blown off or killed because of his actions,” he said. “Anybody that provides information to the enemy is a traitor, period, pure and simple.”

By supposedly removing protection from American soldiers he is responsible for their deaths? By that logic every member of Congress and the president should be charged with murder. They are the ones that have removed the protection of the oceans that lie between this country and the Middle East from the country’s military personnel and put them directly in harm’s way.

Again I will reiterate that Snowden did the right thing. The United States government has been on a “If you see something, say something” kick since 9/11. Snowden saw something and he said something. The problem was he saw something that the government didn’t want him to say anything about and it therefore changed its mind and should have changed its motto to “If you see something illegal being done by the government shut the fuck up, slave.”

Civil Forfeiture Laws Apparently Cover Your Identity

The war on unpatentable drugs has seen the state sink to lower and lower levels in its pursuit to arrest anybody who might challenge their corporate pharmaceutical partner’s monopolies. Civil forfeiture laws are one of the lowest levels. But it seems that civil forfeiture laws don’t just cover cash and cars. If you are suspected of being involved in a drug crime or charged with a drug crime the state can now confiscate your identity:

The Justice Department is claiming, in a little-noticed court filing, that a federal agent had the right to impersonate a young woman online by creating a Facebook page in her name without her knowledge. Government lawyers also are defending the agent’s right to scour the woman’s seized cellphone and to post photographs — including racy pictures of her and even one of her young son and niece — to the phony social media account, which the agent was using to communicate with suspected criminals.

All this, the start argues, is legal and moral as is anything that helps it fight the war on unpatentable drugs. As Radley Balko points out the state is effectively arguing that it can put people individual in very real danger if it means catching drug offenders:

The DOJ filing was in response to Arquiett’s lawsuit. Consider what the federal government is arguing here. It’s arguing that if you’re arrested for a drug crime, including a crime unserious enough to merit a sentence of probation, the government retains the power to (a) steal your identity, (b) use that identity for drug policing, thus making your name and face known to potentially dangerous criminals, (c) interact with those criminals while posing as you, which could subject you to reprisals from those criminals, (d) expose photos of your family, including children, to those criminals, and (e) do all of this without your consent, and with no regard for your safety or public reputation.

It’s funny, in a twisted way, how fervent the state has been in fighting its war on drugs at the expense of its reputation (it’s hard to believe now but before the war on drugs the state had a much higher reputation), the lives of the citizenry, and having to arm almost every police department with enough equipment to qualify them as military forces in most countries. However it can barely find the time, and often can’t, to protect the people, which we continue to hear is the primary job of the state (which is laughable to say the least).

Let the Purges Begin

Ukraine is looking to be the start of Cold War II. Not surprisingly, just as was common during the Cold War, the United States is looking to back some really nice guys. On the anti-Russia side, which means our side, we have Prime Minister Arseniy Yatseniuk who looks like a pissant tyrant in the making.

Mr. Yatseniuk has announced that his regime is going to begin ~~purges~~ loyalty screenings in a McCarthyistic attempt to remove all wrongthinkers:

Ukraine will screen about one million civil servants to root out corrupt practices from the past, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatseniuk has said.

The parliament passed a law on Tuesday, allowing the removal of government officials from their posts.

All those who worked under ousted President Viktor Yanukovych and also former senior Communist and KGB members will be affected.

Like all tyrants Mr. Yatseniuk is selling his loyalty screenings as a narrowly focused effort to remove potentially destabilizing Russian sympathizers. But history has shown that loyalty screenings have a way of going from narrowly focused to so broadly focused that only personal friends of the ruling party members keep from being sent to the camps. Even if these screenings go to that extent we will sweep it under the rug because his regime isn’t supported by Russia and as we learned with America’s support of Pol Pot anybody who is against Russia, no matter how heinous, will receive America’s backing.

Be Careful When Defending Your Home

I’m guessing, based on what I commonly write about, most of you reading this post have some kind of home defense plan. If you don’t waiting until somebody is kicking down your door at oh dark thirty probably isn’t the best time to develop one. But whether you already have a plan or are developing a plan make sure you keep one thing in mind: if the thugs kicking down your door at 05:30 unannounced are wearing a badge you may be killed even if you survive the initial ordeal:

Prosecutors will seek the death penalty against a man charged in the shooting death of a veteran Killeen police officer.

Marvin Louis Guy, 49, has been indicted for capital murder in the shooting death of police Detective Charles “Chuck” Dinwiddie, 47, and is named in indictments charging three counts of attempted capital murder, as well.

During a hearing Thursday, Bell County District Attorney Henry Garza said he’ll seek the death penalty.

The charges stem from a shooting, which occurred as officers served a so-called no-knock search warrant just after 5:30 a.m. May 9 at 1104 Circle M Dr. Apt. 3 in Killeen.

In other words you better have some good fucking night visions because you can’t safely assume that just because somebody is kicking down your door in the wee hours of the morning that you have a valid self-defense claim. If you fail to see those little badges and assume the invaders are non-state thugs and thus believe you can defend yourself you may very well end up facing the death penalty.

Oh, and if you’re wondering, after 12 rigorous hours of searching the home the police didn’t find any drugs.

I am altering the deal. Pray I don’t alter it any further.

Add this story to the reasons you can’t trust anybody these days. A man who was charged with being a terrorist, although he committed no crimes related to terrorism, was first tortured in a South Carolina military prison. After that he was sent to the court system where he was threatened with a life sentence. In 2007 he was sentenced to 17 years in prison. But the justice system is a funny thing and the rules can change on a whim, which is what happened:

MIAMI (Reuters) – A U.S. federal judge in Miami re-sentenced Jose Padilla on Tuesday to 21 years for a 2007 terrorism conviction after an appeals court deemed the original 17-year sentence too lenient.

Now instead of the original 17 years he going to be locked in a cage for 21 years. His crimes? Conspiracy to commit crimes, which means he didn’t actually commit a crime but the state merely said he was planning to do so:

Padilla, an al Qaeda recruit and the first U.S. citizen labeled an enemy combatant, was convicted on charges of conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim people abroad, as well as providing material support for terrorism.

He was accused of plotting to detonate a dirty bomb in the United States. In all likelihood the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) arrested him when he turned out to be too smart to actually press the button on the fake detonator for the fake bomb supplied to him by the agency in another one of its fake terrorist bomb plots.