Tag: Shut Up Slave

The Hypocrisy of Background Checks

There is a great deal of hypocrisy in the state demanding non-state gun buyers submit to background checks. Why should we be expected to submit to a background check when arms of the state are actively blocking an investigation into an operation that involves multiple state departments smuggling guns to Mexican drug cartels:

President Barack Obama is resisting a congressional subpoena for documents related to how the administration responded to the revelation of the failed operation known as “Fast and Furious” on the U.S.- Mexican border. It has already turned over thousands of pages of documents about the operation itself.

Justice Department lawyer Ian Gershengorn told a hearing the matter was best left to the give-and-take of the U.S. government’s two elected branches, the president and Congress, and should not be a matter for the courts.

“That is how it has worked for 225 years,” said Gershengorn, referring to the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson was skeptical and told Gershengorn, “There are three branches here, not just two.” She did not say how she would rule, but questioned Gershengorn for more than twice as long as she did House of Representatives lawyer Kerry Kircher.

If gun control advocates want to prevent gun violence they should focus their attention on the biggest perpetrator of gun violence, the state.

Minnesota Gun Rights Battle Round Two

Several things are certain in life. Water will always be wet, fire will always be hot, and politicians, if you let them, will always try to take more power from you and transfer it to themselves. After the battle here in Minnesota for gun rights concluded with no real changes a couple of politicians have decided to restart their holy crusade:

MINNEAPOLIS — Some Minnesota lawmakers are still hoping to pass tougher gun laws this session, despite a defeat for gun control advocates earlier this week in Washington.

The two main sponsors of gun control legislation in the House and Senate, Rep. Michael Paymar and Sen. Ron Latz, say they are disappointed that a U.S. Senate effort to extend background checks was recently voted down.

The two Democrats are pushing for legislation that would not only increase background checks, but would also patch holes in the state’s background check system and add more crimes to the list of offenses that make a person ineligible to possess a firearm.

This is a battle that will continue until the politicians know that we gun owners will no longer comply with the state. So long as we show a willingness to play their game and obey their decrees they will believe they hold power over us. I’m sure calls will go out for Minnesota gun owners to show up to hearing and make their presence known and all that jazz that didn’t even win us half a year of reprieve. You can do that if you want but I urge you to take a different route. Instead of playing their game by their rules I would urge Minnesota gun owners to play a different game and make it very clear that all new gun control law will be openly disobeyed. Only through massive acts of civil disobedience will we be able to demonstrate the state’s lack of power and only through such demonstration will we be able to convince them to stop pushing for gun control less the general populace realize that the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes and the entire power structure of the state collapses.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Your King

Politicians are notorious liars, cheaters, and thieves. However once in a great while you catch one of these vile creatures being honest about how they feel. Most of the time these brief glimpses of honesty result in shock and disgust from the general populace, even though most of them seem to realize what manner of beast politicians are. Tommy Tucker, a congress critter from North Carolina, recently expressed his personal beliefs to the public:

Sen. Tommy Tucker of Waxhaw said a mouthful with just 13 words on Tuesday.

“I am the senator. You are the citizen. You need to be quiet.”

It was no coincidence that Tucker’s silencing of an N.C. newspaper publisher – heard by at least three people who were there – came just after he railroaded a bill through his committee that would let government operate in more secrecy.

Mr. Tucker is the manner lord and your are but mere serfs. Shut your filthy holes before he has you drug out to the public square and hanged. While the views expressed by Mr. Tucker may seem odd coming from a so-called representative they are most likely shared with most of his cohorts. One need only look at the laws being passed in the United States to see how the political body views non-state agents. It seems that every law passed expands the state’s power in some manner and restricts the legal actions available to non-state agents. If anything Mr. Tucker should be thanked for his willingness to be honest. Were more politicians honest about their beliefs it’s likely that things in this country would begin to change for the better.

Our Nation of Laws

My favorite thing about living in a nation of laws is that we have so many laws that our overlords can do whatever they want. The gun control bill has been pulled by Mr. Reid but Mr. Obama is going to use his great powers as the king of the Executive Branch to implement gun control:

On a conference call with “stakeholders,” Biden told gun control advocates that the fight is not over and that eventual action on gun control will come. Press were not invited to the conference call; a participant provided BuzzFeed with access.

“Look, I know you’re going to say that I’m just being an optimist and I’m trying to put a good face on this. But, you know, I’ve been around here a long time and we’ve already done, because of you, some really good things,” Biden said. “Number one, the president is already lining up some additional executive actions he’s going to be taking later this week.”

After the Newtown shootings, Obama took a number of executive actions to expand research into gun violence and other areas favored by the gun control community. He took the actions without congressional approval, leading to outrage by some conservatives.

The system works like a well oiled machine. When one branch of the state fails to accomplish something another branch moves in. The best part is that any action Obama takes will be legal until either Congress says no (which will never happen, Congress has been ceding power to the President since the start of this country) or the Nazgûl in the Supreme Court rule otherwise (and they probably won’t hear the case). Statism always seems like such a good idea until the people in power inevitably find out they have the power to do whatever they want.

More Empty Promises from Obama

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is coming up for a vote. If it passes it will create a tighter marriage between the state and service providers. It will also be a boon for the technology industry because the passage of the legislation will also mean the need for new software for agencies and service providers to share data with one another, which is why so many major technology companies support the bill. Besides the state and politically well-connected technology companies everybody else will suffer. In a political stunt likely aimed at generating some positive feedback Mr. Obama has said he will veto CISPA if it passes:

As an amended version of CISPA nears a vote on the House floor, the White House has once again stated that it has fundamental problems with the cybersecurity bill in its current form. In an official policy statement, the Obama Administration said that lawmakers had not addressed several issues regarding information-sharing and privacy, and that “if the bill, as currently crafted, were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.” Instead, it urged a continuing dialog between Congress and the President in order to create a more acceptable version.

We’ve witnessed Obama’s veto threat before when the indefinite detainment clause of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was up for a vote. As it turned out the threat was only made because he was worried he wouldn’t get as many additional powers as he wanted. I’m guessing CISPA’s current form doesn’t give the executive branch enough power so the threat of a veto has been made until more power is handed over.

Demands to Expand the Surveillance State Arrive on Schedule

I said the first thing the state would grab for after the bombings in Boston were more surveillance powers. As if on queue a Republican from New York is using Monday’s tragedy to demand more cameras to spy on the general populace:

ANDREA MITCHELL, MSNBC: Congressman, briefly, do you think that this will lead to more cameras? I know it’s controversial, there are privacy issues. Boston does have a lot of cameras. European cities, led by London, have the most. Are Americans going to have to get used to more surveillance on a daily basis?

REP. PETER KING (R-NY): I think we do because I think privacy involves being in a private location. Being out in the street is not an expectation of privacy. Anyone can look at you, can see you, can watch what you’re doing. A camera just makes it more sophisticated, but it’s no different from your neighbor looking out the window at you or a police officer looking at you walking down the street.

So, I do think we need more cameras.

Surveillance powers are always the first thing the state grabs for after a tragedy. It’s a fairly safe thing to demand because the general population often view more state surveillance powers are rather benign. Another benefit of surveillance powers is that it expands the state’s watch without having to expand the number of people employed by the state to any notable extent, which keeps more money in the hands of the politicians. Before you know it we’ll be emulating London’s Big Brother situation.

Prediction Time

Yesterday explosives were detonated at the finish line of the Boston Marathon and a fire broke out at the John F. Kennedy Library. The news cycle will likely consist of wall-to-wall coverage of this event until Friday. During that coverage many speculations and accusations of who is at fault for the explosions will be made. The New York Post is already running with the standard schtick that the perpetrator was a brown person from the Middle East. In all likelihood the war mongers will emulate the Post’s direction and blame the act of an extremist Muslim brown person with ties to al-Qaeda while the Southern Poverty Law Center will blame the act on extremist right-wing Christian white people with ties to to the Ku Klux Klan and several neo-Nazi organizations. For all we know the explosives were set off by a Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) created terrorist after somebody in ordinance accidentally supplied real bombs instead of the usual fake bombs (that’s called snark, it’s not a serious accusation). In the end it will probably take some time to determine who the culprit was but that won’t stop the state from immediately exploiting the tragedy to justify another power grab.

Here are my predictions of what is to come. First the state will grab for more surveillance powers, as it always does after a tragedy. That means the recent opposition to the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) will vanish. CISPA will be pushed through under the auspices of ensuring a tragedy like this never happens again. The Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) high speed low drag Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) teams will be present at every high profile sporting event, not just events that take place in expensive stadiums. VIPR teams aren’t the only thing we’re likely to see at sporting events in the future, I’ll bet good money that restrictions against domestic drone usage will be loosened. The state’s eyes in the sky will probably be patrolling metropolitan areas with notable frequency. Additional powers will also be claimed by the federal government for its war on foreign and domestic terrorists.

In summary we’re in for the same shit as usual. If there’s one thing the state never lets go to waste it’s a tragedy.

Kansas City Police Kick Homeless Individuals Out of Unused Tunnels

While I agree with the expressed idea of self-proclaimed progressives that society should better care for the homeless I disagree with their tactics. Self-proclaimed progressives always want the state to get involved and, as I’ve explained, the state would rather see homeless people die off because they have on wealth to expropriate. Demonstrating the conflict of interest I talked about Kansas City police found a community of homeless people living in unused tunnels. What did the police do? Kicked the homeless out of the tunnels that they then filled in to ensure nobody could return:

Police and volunteers from Hope Faith Ministries first visited the camps on Tuesday to advise the residents they had to clear out by Friday. After repeated visits, they encountered only four people, but it was obvious that many others lived there. Cooley said three of the four either accepted services offered or said they would.

On Friday, city public works crews used a Bobcat to close up the tunnels and holes after they were searched by a police robot with a camera. Representatives from the Department of Veterans Affairs also were on hand to offer services. Animal Control came because police had reason to think there might be a dangerous pit bull on site, but they did not encounter one.

Whenever the police strike out against the homeless they always concoct some excuse. Usually they claim to be enforcing health or safety regulations but this time around the police merely used the excuse that cooper had been stolen in the area:

It was found while police were investigating copper thefts in the industrial area of the East Bottoms, some of which are very costly. Police have previously encountered evidence of copper thefts at other camps and think some homeless people are responsible for some thefts and may serve as lookouts for larger theft operatives.

Even though the police had no evidence (at least no evidence has been put forward that I can find) that the homeless individuals in the tunnels were the thieves they rousted them anyways. In all likelihood the accusations copper thefts was merely a convenient excuse to kick the homeless out of the area so they could become some other city’s problem. Most large municipalities seem to believe that the best way to deal with the homeless is to make their lives so miserable that they flee to somewhere else. That’s the kind of “charity” you get from the state. If a person isn’t a revenue source they are roughed up and told to go elsewhere, locked into a cage, or outright murdered. Using the state to help those in need will never succeed because the state has no use for those who truly have nothing to expropriate.

Fear Mongering and Cyber War

For some time the United States government has been beating the cyber war drum. We’re lead to believe that foreign nations are going to hack into all of the nation’s networks and cause destruction and mayhem. In fact, according to Mike Rogers, the scary foreign hackers are already inside of your computers:

The House Intelligence Committee is warning that “time is running out” before the next major cyberattack: The Russians, Iranians, Chinese and others are likely already on your computer.

“You have criminal organizations trying to get into your personal computer and steal your personal stuff. And by the way, the Chinese are probably on your computer, the Russians are probably on your personal computer, the Iranians are already there,” House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers (R.-MI). told Fox News.

One is left to wonder what Mr. Rogers means by the Russians, Chinese, and Iranians. Does he means hackers living in those countries or agents of those countries’ governments? From his statement I’m left to believe he means the government agents of those countries. In all likelihood nobody inside of the governments of Russia, China, or Iran give two shits about the data on your personal computer. There are two things to consider: breaking into a computer requires effort and having access to all data on all personal computers would leave one with so much data to sift through that their efforts would be rendered worthless. If the Russians, Chinese, or Iranians are going to sink resources into compromising systems they are probably going to expect a good payoff. Breaking into one of my systems isn’t going to give them much of value so they are unlikely to sink resources into attempting to compromise my systems. Most of your are likely in the same boat as me. The real threat to most people are regular malicious hackers who want to create botnets. Those hackers generally work for themselves or a non-state crime syndicate.

I believe it’s also worth pointing out the language Mr. Rogers used. He said the Russians and Chinese are probably in your computer but knows for a fact that the Iranians already are. Isn’t it strange that the nation the United States government has been trying to declare war on for the last several decades is known, for a fact, to be in your computer but the most technologically advanced nation of the three, China, is potentially in your computer? It’s almost as if Mr. Rogers is trying to drum up fear of Iran specifically.

We all know what this is about though:

Rogers believes the Cyber Intelligence and Sharing Protection Act (CISPA) can help counter that threat. The bill was introduced last year and passed the House, though it failed to make it through the Senate following a groundswell of concern from privacy activists.

Be afraid you stupid serfs! Allow us in the state to pass laws that grant us the ability to spy on your communications so we can protect you from the scary people are aren’t from around here!

What Rogers wants is the legal ability for the United States government to compromise your system. He wants the exact thing he’s using to strike fear into the hearts of Americans. Computers are a good tool for the state to use to generate fear. A majority of computer users lack a good understanding of the underlying technology and people tend to fear what they don’t understand. This is why foreign states are also good tools to use to generate fear, most Americans have very little knowledge of foreign countries. Combining the two makes for a very effective tool to generate fear that can be used to sucker the public into supporting most government control over their lives.

IRS Claims They can Read Your E-Mail Without a Warrant; They Can’t (Unless You Let Them)

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) believes that they can read your e-mails without acquiring a warrant:

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has claimed that agents do not need warrants to read people’s emails, text messages and other private electronic communications, according to internal agency documents.

[…]

In a 2009 handbook, the IRS said the Fourth Amendment does not protect emails because Internet users “do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such communications.” A 2010 presentation by the IRS Office of General Counsel reiterated the policy.

It’s fortunate that we live in a world where what the IRS thinks and what is actually true are two different things. While the Fourth Amendment doesn’t offer any protection from warrantless searches OpenPGP does. Enigmail is a plugin for Thunderbird that lets you easily encrypt your e-mail with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP). By encrypting your e-mail you can ensure only the intended recipient(s) can read it. Even if the IRS obtains a warrant to copy your e-mails from your service provider’s servers it won’t do them any good because they won’t be able to read those e-mails.

The IRS, or any other state agency, can only read your e-mail if you let them.