Tag: Shut Up Slave

NSA and GCHQ Have You Webcam Pics. Yes, Even That One.

The well of National Security Agency (NSA) and Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) scandals has yet to run dry. Now it has come to light that the GCHQ, with assistance from the NSA, has been collecting webcam footage from Yahoo! users:

Britain’s surveillance agency GCHQ, with aid from the US National Security Agency, intercepted and stored the webcam images of millions of internet users not suspected of wrongdoing, secret documents reveal.

GCHQ files dating between 2008 and 2010 explicitly state that a surveillance program codenamed Optic Nerve collected still images of Yahoo webcam chats in bulk and saved them to agency databases, regardless of whether individual users were an intelligence target or not.

In one six-month period in 2008 alone, the agency collected webcam imagery – including substantial quantities of sexually explicit communications – from more than 1.8 million Yahoo user accounts globally.

I’m sure the agency’s database is chock-full of penis and boob pics. In fact I’m guessing that that was the primary purpose of Optic Nerve. Agents from both agencies are probably searching the database right now hoping to find some pictures to wank off to.

I’m Not Saying Legislators are Gold Diggers

But they are. Here in Minnesota the legislators have moved to remove the prohibition that prevents them from accepting certain gifts from lobbyists:

On opening day of the 2014 legislative session, a House committee approved a reversal of recent changes to the state’s long-standing ban on legislators accepting gifts from lobbyists.

As of the last legislative session, lawmakers can now accept food and beverages from lobbyists – for instance, at a reception hosted by a lobbying firm – so long as every member of the Legislature is invited.

I think this really shows how corrupt legislators are. The problem for them wasn’t that they could be wined and dined by lobbyists. It’s that some legislators were more apt to get wined and dined and that wasn’t fair to their colleagues. But if a lobbyist is willing to wine and dine all of the legislators then the gift of fancy food and drink can be accepted.

Power has its perks. When you can make the rules that apply to your profession, including what gifts you can accept and how much you can get paid, life is pretty sweet.

Connecticut Moving to Confiscate Aesthetically Offensive Firearms

Gun control advocates like to point out that registration is not confiscation. Gun rights advocates like to point out that registration leads to confiscation. A recent development in Connecticut shows that the gun rights advocates are, regardless of claims made by gun control advocates, not paranoid nutcases:

That triggered widespread dumbfounded confusion amongst state officials, including Governor Malloy, who seemingly cant seem to accept the fact that people are willfully refusing to comply with the arbitrary diktats of their tyrannical “leaders“. Since Jan 1st 2014, Malloy has come up with any number of excuses to explain what to him and others like him is incomprehensible.

At various times blaming it on the Post Office closing early on Dec 31st 2013, for “confusion” and most recently at a Winter Governors Association Meeting last week he finally resorted to simply saying he refuses to believe the numbers are accurate and that people really are actually complying. ( http://tiny.cc/ivjubx )

See the a copy of a letter sent by the Connecticut State Police to one resident, whose registration paperwork was rejected, (right).

The problem now becomes, even though the paperwork was rejected it is without a doubt certain that the Connecticut State Police kept the declaration of ownership and now have at least some official records of those who are not in compliance. It was reported late yesterday by the Manchester Journal Inquirer ( http://tiny.cc/9qlubx ) that letters are now going out to at least a certain number of gun owners that they have been found to be in non compliance with the law and were technically felons.

This is why you never register firearms. By registering you admit that you are in possession of a firearm that the state is interested in. If the state is interested in a type of firearm you can all but guarantee that it will eventually become interested in confiscating that type of firearm. But confiscation doesn’t always have to come in the form of a piece of legislation. Police officers charged with handling registration forms can merely claim that the form was not properly filled out and therefore the weapon listed on said form is forfeit, which appears to be what is happening in Connecticut.

Enforcing this law will become interesting. As I stated earlier, Connecticut doesn’t have sufficient cages to house all of the potential violators of this new registration scheme. However it may have enough cages to select a few individuals who did register, claim that their paperwork wasn’t properly filled out, and prosecute them. As that appears to be the strategy selected by the Connecticut law enforcers those who registered their firearms also painted a gigantic target on their backs.

Never register your firearms. It’s a lesson that cannot be stated enough times. When you do register in the hopes of avoiding the wrath of the state you risk making yourself a target. But what the state doesn’t know about it can’t go after. So long as it doesn’t know about the firearms (or any other property) you possess it cannot move to confiscate them.

Answering the Door When Psychopaths Come Knocking is a Bad Idea

Answering the door when psychopaths come knocking is never a good idea. But sometimes it’s unavoidable so I’m going to give a few tips for dealing with such a situation.

The first thing to do is identify whether or not the person knocking is a psychopath. Identifying a psychopath isn’t always easy but some of them make their mental disorder obvious. If the person knocking at the door is wearing a state issued costume that includes a shiny badge that is your first indication that the person is likely a psychopath. Oftentimes these costume-clad individuals will be carrying various weapons. It’s crucial to determine whether or not the weapons being carried are holstered or aimed at the door. In the case of the latter it’s best not to answer.

But you may be forced to answer. In such a case there are some tips you should keep in mind. The very first thing you should do is hide any dogs that you may have in the house. Psychopaths of the badged variety have a propensity to shoot dogs. It’s also a good idea to hide any friends of family members who may be over because the lack of K9 targets may cause the psychopaths at the door to seek human blood instead. After all living creatures have been hidden away make sure you have nothing in your hands. Don’t answer the door with a drink, a sandwich, or a game controller in your hand:

EUHARLEE, Ga. – An attorney representing the family of a 17-year-old Georgia boy who was shot and killed by a police officer says the boy was holding a video game controller when he was shot after opening his door.

Christopher Roupe was fatally shot in the chest Friday, Feb. 14 when Euharlee officers showed up at the door of his mobile home to serve a probation violation warrant for the boy’s father, WSB-TV reports. A female officer reportedly told the Georgia Bureau of Investigation that Roupe pointed a gun at her after he opened the door.

But the family’s attorney, Cole Law, said the boy was holding a Nintendo Wii video game controller, and was about to watch a movie.

What makes these situations worse is that the badged nutcases are considered trusted authority figures by the state. That means several novel-length legal books exist excusing this type of behavior and granting these badged thugs the authority to kick in your door if you don’t answer it (and sometimes they can kick it in if you do try to answer it). Heed the advice given above and you may survive one of these encounters.

Knock knock. Who’s there? Your Creditor.

A time marches on it seems American companies are becoming more bold about the clauses they insert into their contracts. Capital One has recently updates the contracts of its customers to include a clause that allows the company to send representatives to make house calls to its debtors:

Credit card issuer Capital One isn’t shy about getting into customers’ faces. The company recently sent a contract update to cardholders that makes clear it can drop by any time it pleases.

The update specifies that “we may contact you in any manner we choose” and that such contacts can include calls, emails, texts, faxes or a “personal visit.”

As if that weren’t creepy enough, Cap One says these visits can be “at your home and at your place of employment.”

The police need a court order to pull off something like that. But Cap One says it has the right to get up close and personal anytime, anywhere.

[…]

Incredibly, Cap One’s aggressiveness doesn’t stop with personal visits. The company’s contract update also includes this little road apple:

“We may modify or suppress caller ID and similar services and identify ourselves on these services in any manner we choose.”

While Capital One, according to the article, claims it doesn’t visit card holders or send debt collectors to visit customers I think the clause has more to do with the future. As the economy continues to crumble creditors are likely going to become more aggressive in collecting on outstanding debt. We will likely see creditors inserting more clauses in their contracts that enable them to take more aggressive actions against their debtors.

I’m sure many legal challenges will be made against these increasingly aggressive contractual clauses. In all likelihood courts will end up ruling in favor of the creditors in a vast majority of cases since the major creditors in this country are so closely tied to the state that the two are almost indistinguishable. That will make life ever harder for debtors.

This is why I’m glad that I don’t currently have any outstanding debt. I inherited my parents’ distaste for debt and will only incur it if no other options are available. In my fight for liberty this has helped me live freer and I firmly believe that one of the biggest steps an individual can make to increase their liberty is to pay off any incurred debt.

We’re Going to Need More Cages

Via Shall Not Be Questioned I came across an opinion piece from a guy who wants Connecticut to strictly enforce its new “assault weapon” registration law:

Connecticut has a gun problem.

It’s estimated that perhaps scores of thousands of Connecticut residents failed to register their military-style assault weapons with state police by Dec. 31.

[…]

Although willful noncompliance with the law is doubtless a major issue, it’s possible that many gun owners are unaware of their obligation to register military-style assault weapons and would do so if given another chance.

But the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law. Authorities should use the background check database as a way to find assault weapon purchasers who might not have registered those guns in compliance with the new law.

A Class D felony calls for a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Even much lesser penalties or probation would mar a heretofore clean record and could adversely affect, say, the ability to have a pistol permit.

If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences.

Let’s consider the logistics of what the author is advocating. It’s estimated that tens of thousands of Connecticut gun owners failed to comply with the new “assault weapon” restrictions. The author wants Connecticut law enforcement agents to use the background check system to discover who may own an “assault weapon” and have him kidnapped and held in a cage for five years. Connecticut already has overcrowded prisons so new facilities would have to be constructed. Back in 1995 the Connecticut General Assembly responded to a request to know the costs associated with building new prison capacity. The cost per bed in Connecticut, at that time, was estimated to be $50,388.

Using a very conservative estimate of 20,000 noncompliant gun owners (since there are multiple tens of thousands I went with the lowest possible figure of 20,000) and 1995 prices to build new cages (because that’s the most recent information I was able to obtain) the state of Connecticut would be look at paying out $1,007,760,000 just to add the capacity necessary to cage all of these gun owners. Again, this figure is a low ball figure since the cost of constructing a new cage is higher than in 1995 and the number of noncompliant gun owners likely exceeds 20,000. But we get the idea that the costs of doing as the author recommends would be mind bogglingly high.

And what would Connecticut get out of spending over one billion dollars to enforce its new law? Not a damn thing. Merely being in possession of an aesthetically offensive semi-automatic rifle doesn’t make an individual violent. The satisfaction that could be obtained from doing what the author advocates is vengeance against the disobedient. If we want to go down that route I’m sure I can find several felonies the author committed in the last week and demand he be caged for them.

You Can’t Own Property, Man

Private property is often held up as one of the founding principles of the United States. But private property doesn’t exist, the state owns all property. This is why armed thugs with badges can order you to evacuate your home and then occupy and ransack it:

Franz said it all started shortly after overhearing a fight at her neighbor’s house across the street Sunday. A short time later, the SWAT team swarmed her neighborhood.

“The cop goes ‘You all need to leave, you can’t be in your house,'” said Franz.

That happened around 1 p.m. About six hours later, deputies cleared the scene and she went back home. But something was off when she walked through the door.

“I stopped, I froze because I realized somebody had messed with my TV,” said Franz.

Franz said her blinds were opened, her Xbox and TV were disconnected, and a drape over her bedroom window was thrown on the floor.

At first she thought it was a burglar but then realized nothing was missing.

[…]

Franz said she called the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office to complain.

“He did call me back and he said ‘Yeah Ms. Franz my men did come in your house,'” said Franz.

What else could Franz have done? Had she refused to leave the SWAT officers would likely have kidnapped her or executed her on the spot. Legally speaking there probably isn’t much she can do since, as the story points out, there are exceptions to the warrant requirement for officers entering a home. Those exceptions aren’t clear cut and the police typically get off without punishment even when they do something illegal.

This story further reinforces the lesson that the state owns all property and we’re simply allowed to rent some of it. The second we fail to pay our rent, err, property tax or a costume-clad thug with a badge wants it we must either leave or face the state’s violence.

Pigs Hate Dogs

It’s a new morning and that means another dog has been shot by a cop. This time an officer decided to take out a man’s service dog — on the man’s son’s birthday:

FILER • A dog is dead, and its owner is alleging trigger-happy police work after a Filer officer shot the animal Saturday outside his home.

Police, however, say the dog was aggressive and had to be put down.

Rick Clubb said Monday that his son’s 9th birthday party was wrapping up about 5:30 p.m. when Officer Tarek Hassani came to his home on Jacklyne Circle on complaints of dogs running at-large.

He shot the 7-year-old black labrador, “Hooch,” Clubb said, though it showed no aggressive behavior.

I’m not surprised that the cops are claiming that the animal was acting aggressively since that’s the excuse they always use. But this time the fiasco was caught on film:

Had a hairless ape been kicking at me I’d be a bit aggressive as well. But the dog must be given a great deal of credit. Even though the officer was kicking at it the dog never actually attacked him. Of course the officer still put a bullet in the poor beast because killing a dog doesn’t end in punishment unlike killing a human (which can end in a lot of paperwork and nobody likes paperwork).

This video leads me to wonder if the officer acted aggressively towards the dog specifically to rile it up and therefore have a justification to shoot it. I’m then left to wonder how often such scenarios play out. Could it be that many of the incidents of “dogs acting aggressively” are due to officers first acting aggressively towards those dogs just to get a desired response?

Going Full Retard

That’s valuable advice. When you go full retard you inevitably make an ass of yourself and nobody ever takes you seriously again. Apparently these individuals never learned that lesson:

HIGHLAND, Utah – Billed as a call for an uprising, opponents of same-sex marriage gathered for a meeting in Highland on Saturday.

Former Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack spoke about issues concerning the U.S. Constitution, including same-sex marriage.

Mack says that since it appears that Herbert and other elected leaders have failed at their jobs, it’s up to law enforcement and everyday citizens to deny same-sex marriage.

And what, exactly, are law enforcement agents and everyday citizens supposed to do to stop same-sex marriages? Are law enforcement agents expected to kick in the doors of same-sex couples and shoot their dog to send a message? Are everyday citizens supposed to show up to same-sex weddings, beat everybody attending, and burn the place to the ground? How far is this holy crusade supposed to go?

“The people of Utah have rights, too, not just the homosexuals. The homosexuals are shoving their agenda down our throats,” Mack said.

What a strange false dichotomy. By saying “the people of Utah” Mr. Mack necessarily included homosexuals because homosexuals are, like Soylent Green, people! But I’m not sure why non-homosexuals have the right to infringe on a voluntary union between two individuals of the same sex. Obviously I’m not the master of all but from my vantage point of a person who likes to leave other people alone it seems as though two individuals should be allowed to enter into any voluntary arrangement they so desire.

Cherilyn Eager, who helped organize the event, says that it’s time for the citizens of Utah to speak up for their rights.

“We need people to stand up and speak out. We need to get noisy. We need some outrage,” Eager said. ”It is about the sheriffs now coming out to protect the people.”

Outrage? The United States is engaged in several unwarranted foreign wars, the homeless are treated like shit in most of the country, and the police are acting like an occupying military force. If you’re not outraged by now you either have a very Discordian view of things that helps you cope with such nonsense in a humorous way or your priorities are a bit strange. I fail to see how two individual entering into a voluntary union should spark more outrage than wars, abuses against the needy, and police brutality. In a voluntary union nobody gets hurt or dies while in the latter three people do get hurt and die.

Here’s my question for everybody up in arms about same-sex marriage: why do you care? Seriously. It seems like an awfully stupid thing to invest time in worrying about. If somebody was trying to force churches to perform same-sex marriages against their will I would understand the outrage. But when the status of same-sex marriage flips from illegal to legal it seems entirely pointless to complain about. Hell, most of the loudest opponents to legalizing same-sex marriages are the organizations ultimately responsible for the legalization. Had the currently complaining religious institutions fought the state’s attempt to define marriage then this entire fiasco could have been avoided. But you had to get the state involved and now you’re upset because the state isn’t doing what you want anymore.

Instead of getting up in arms about legalized same-sex marriage why not get up in arms about something that actually involves people being hurt or killed?

Politics is Violence

People often don’t agree with my belief that politics is a necessarily violent affair. They seem to think threatening people by proxy isn’t violence, which is a concept I find baffling. But once in a while the proxies are set aside and politicos actually get the balls to threaten and assault each other directly. At least one of last night’s caucus devolved into direct violence:

A heavily attended caucus in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood ended abruptly Tuesday night after an altercation between activists.

About 300 people, nearly all of them Somali-American, attended the event at the Brian Coyle Center. Most of them were there to support Mohamud Noor, who is challenging Rep. Phyllis Kahn for a seat in the Minnesota House.

The altercation over who would chair the event took place before any delegates were elected. Two women outside the meeting said that an aide for council member Andrew Johnson, Ilham Omar, was attacked.

“She was attacked,” Johnson confirmed in an interview. “She’s got some bruises and cuts but she’s going to be fine.”

Police escorting people outside said that no one was arrested.

Why would anybody expect less? A caucus is little more than a group of people getting together to argue about how they believe their political party should force everybody to live. When an event revolves around discussing how to aim the state’s guns at the people it’s going to attract psychopaths. Any room packed with psychopaths is a powder keg that is waiting to explode. The fact that more caucuses don’t devolve into violence is actually a testament to how well psychopaths can control themselves when they believe it will gain them politically.