Tag: Your Government Doesn’t Love You

America No Longer Has a Monopoly on Reinterpreting Constitutions

For the longest time it seemed that no challenger existed to the United States’ monopoly on reinterpreting its own Constitution. Thankfully some competition has arisen as Japan has learned how to reinterpret its own constitution:

Under its constitution, Japan is barred from using force to resolve conflicts except in cases of self-defence.

But a reinterpretation of the law will now allow “collective self-defence” – using force to defend allies under attack.

Obviously this is good news for the United States. One of the biggest mistakes America made after World War II was disallowing Japan the ability to initiate force against foreign countries. This has prevented the island nation from joining us in many of our foreign excursions. Because we have been unable to access Japan’s first-hand experience at empire building we’ve been forced to muddle about as we try to learn how to play the game.

In addition to learning how to reinterpret its own constitution it appears as though Japan’s war mongering prime minister has also learned the American way of selling such shenanigans to his people:

PM Shinzo Abe has been pushing hard for the move, arguing Japan needs to adapt to a changing security environment.

“No matter what the circumstances, I will protect Japanese people’s lives and peaceful existence,” he told journalists after the change was approved.

Don’t worry citizens it’s all in the name of national security. While this reinterpretation of the constitution may seem like the wrong course of action trust me when I tell you that the barbarians at the gate will get you in your sleep if I don’t make this change. Now return to your jobs and wait until I declare war on a foreign nation (whose name will totally not be China) and force all of you to die in the name of our (and by “our” I mean my) glorious crusade!

Slaying Net Neutrality Under the Guise of Cyber Security

It has become obvious to our overlords in government that us slaves are rather fond of the way the Internet has worked since day one. But its corporate partners have dictated that they desire legal permission to throttle traffic selectively and what the government’s corporate partners want they get. So it’s time to play that wicked game again where the government slips in what it wants to do under the guise of something else. Net neutrality is now being sold as cyber security:

The cybersecurity bill making its way through the Senate right now is so broad that it could allow ISPs to classify Netflix as a “cyber threat,” which would allow them to throttle the streaming service’s delivery to customers.

[…]

The bill, as it’s written, allows companies to employ “countermeasures” against “cybersecurity threats,” but both terms are extremely broadly defined, and video streaming could easily fall within the purview of the latter.

“A ‘threat,’ according to the bill, is anything that makes information unavailable or less available. So, high-bandwidth uses of some types of information make other types of information that go along the same pipe less available,” Greg Nojeim, a lawyer with the Center for Democracy and Technology, told me. “A company could, as a cybersecurity countermeasure, slow down Netflix in order to make other data going across its pipes more available to users.”

You would think with a Senate full of lawyers that net neutrality could be force fed down our throat in a slightly more subtle way. This strategy just reeks of laziness in my opinion. There is only a handful of things I expect the government to do well: killing people, expropriating wealth from the people, pretend that it’s benevolent, and slyly sneak in its corporate partner’s agenda in a way that we don’t readily recognize.

But there you have it, net neutrality is now part of cyber security. And while cyber security hasn’t received much love from the slaves it’s easier to force feed to them because it’s part of OH MY GOD NATIONAL SECURITY!

Possibly the World’s Largest Pre-Digital Porn Collection

The United States is famous for its puritan views on sex. But the United States government has been smart enough, for the most part, to leave people’s porn alone. That wasn’t the case in the Soviet Union. Thanks to confiscation the Soviet government managed to create what is possibly one of the largest porn collections predating cheap high capacity digital storage devices:

It was the kinkiest secret in the Soviet Union: Across from the Kremlin, the country’s main library held a pornographic treasure trove. Founded by the Bolsheviks as a repository for aristocrats’ erotica, the collection eventually grew to house 12,000 items from around the world, ranging from 18th-century Japanese engravings to Nixon-era romance novels.

Of course privilege has its benefits. While the porn collection was off limits to the petty proletariat it was always available to the dictatorship of the proletariat (who were totally not bourgeois):

Off limits to the general public, the collection was always open to top party brass, some of whom are said to have enjoyed visiting. Today, the spetskhran is no more, but the collection is still something of a secret: There is no complete compendium of its contents, and many of them are still unlisted in the catalogue.

I’m sure that section of the library had to be steam cleaned multiple times a day.

The Soviet Union is a fascinating society to study. It was a society built upon the ideals of Karl Marx, which were supposed to usher in a new era of prosperity for the working class. Instead it ended up as one of the most oppressive states in the world. The so-called dictatorship of the proletariat attempted to control every aspect of its peoples’ lives. Everything from the houses they lived in to the jobs they worked to the porn they consumed had to receive an official stamp from a Soviet bureaucrat to ensure it wasn’t anti-revolutionary, bourgeois, or whatever other imaginary threat the heads of the union came up with.

Hobby Lobby

The Nazgûl managed to stir up a bunch of political drama by ruling that privately held companies whose owners hold strong religious beliefs can be exempted for providing funding for certain contraceptives:

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby on Monday that for-profit employers with religious objections can opt out of providing contraception coverage under Obamacare.

The ruling deals directly with only a small provision of Obamacare and will not take down the entire law but it amounts to a huge black eye for Obamacare, the administration and its backers. The justices have given Obamacare opponents their most significant political victory against the health care law, reinforcing their argument that the law and President Barack Obama are encroaching on Americans’ freedoms.

As you can expect the Internet has exploded. Feminists are decrying this as a direct strike against women’s rights and the religious are hailing this as a great victory for religious freedom. Both sides, in their fervor to be louder than the other side, are missing the big picture. This battle isn’t one of women’s rights versus religious freedom, it’s the inevitable outcome of this country’s state-employer-insurer complex. Or as I like to call it the trinity of fuckery.

The state really made this entire fiasco possible. Today most people receive health insurance as part of their employee benefits package. Have you ever wondered why health insurance is tied to your employer? It’s because employers needed a way to provide higher wages during a time when the state implemented wage controls. Since the state said that employers couldn’t pay employees a higher wage employers decided to offer benefits, including health insurance, to bypass the controls. Today the state has further solidified the unity between health insurance and employment by mandating almost every employer provider employees with specific types of health insurance. That last part, requiring specific types of insurance, is the real kicker because it mandates certain types of contraceptives that many religious individuals oppose.

An employer with strongly held religious convictions is going to have problems funding coverage for certain types of contraceptives and abortions. Since they’re being mandated by the state to provide health insurance and that health insurance must cover some of the contraceptives they find objectionable they are using the only avenue left open to them: the courts. Hobby Lobby in this case decided to fight the contraceptive coverage and the state made an arbitrary decision, which sided with Hobby Lobby in this case. You can argue that the ruling was just or unjust until you’re blue in the face but it doesn’t matter what you believe. It only matters what the state believes.

Had the state never implemented wage controls and thus tied health insurance to employment we wouldn’t be in this mess. Assuming a lack of some other form of state meddling, employees would then be free to buy whatever health insurance plan worked for them. People with strong religious convictions against contraceptives could get a health insurance plan that didn’t cover contraceptives while people who want contraceptive coverage could get a plan that offered it. Their employer wouldn’t have a say in the matter since they wouldn’t be providing it. So the only viable solution is to break apart the trinity of fuckery.

The Statists Over at Salon Confuse Me

I have to say that the statists over at Salon really confuse me. Via Gun Free Zone I had the opportunity to read this attempt at fear mongering by Salon. The author tries to argue that gun owners are terrorizing the nation but his opening paragraph presents a different story:

Here is a truth so fundamental that it should be self-evident: When legitimately constituted state authority stands down in the face of armed threats, the very foundation of the republic is in danger. And yet that is exactly what happened at Cliven Bundy’s Nevada ranch this spring: An alleged criminal defeated the cops, because the forces of lawlessness came at them with guns — then Bureau of Land Management officials further surrendered by removing the government markings from their vehicles to prevent violence against them.

I’m not a big fan of Cliven Bundy. The guy comes off as a self-righteous asshole to me. But to claim he did anything wrong by trying to defend land against a marauding gang is pretty stupid. What the author claims to be a “legitimately constituted state authority”, a phrase that in of itself is oxymoronic, is nothing more than a gang of thugs roaming around claiming everything within an imaginary set of lines on a map as its own.

The author is trying to making the argument that Bundy, by managing to make the state reconsider its usual brutish tactics, terrorized America. But the “legitimately constituted state authority” has been terrorizing America, and the rest of the world, for over 250 years. George Washington himself marched an armed force against a handful of whiskey producers because they failed to pay Washington’s gang protection money. Today the tradition continues. If you do something the state doesn’t like it sends armed thugs after you in an attempt to intimidate you. Growing a little cannabis? You may find your home being raided by armed thugs at two in the morning who start by burning your child with a flashbang (an article in Salon about real terrorism) and shooting your dog. Exceeding the arbitrarily posted maximum speed? Expect a road pirate to pull you over, walk up to your car, and demand you pay his gang protection money or face potential kidnapping and imprisonment. And God help you if you’re homeless because the state is going to make your life even more of a living hell.

This is the problem with statists. They claim that the gang they support is legitimate. Anybody who crosses their preferred gang is terrorizing “the people”. It’s one of the most idiotic arguments that has ever been muttered because “the people” are being terrorized by the statist’s preferred gang.

For $600,000 a Month You Too Can Hire a Failure as a Security Consultant

Do you have $600,000 a month to burn? Do you hate children or the homeless too much to use it to help them? Do you like to give money to former government goods? If you answered yes to all three I have a deal for you. Keith Alexander, the former head of the National Security Agency (NSA), has a cybersecurity consulting company called IronNet Cybersecurity Incorporated:

Alexander offered to provide advice to Sifma for $1 million a month, according to two people briefed on the talks. The asking price later dropped to $600,000, the people said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the negotiation was private.

$600,000 a month to get security advice from a man who couldn’t stop one consultant from walking off with his agency’s secrets on a thumb driver. Sounds like a good bargain to me!

But Keith’s position is an example of an all too common phenomenon among former government goons. After leaving his post with the state he returns to the private sector to use the knowledge and contacts to rake in massive amounts of cash. It’s why threats to dismiss state goons is so ineffective. They know once they are kicked out of their position they can use the contacts they made while working for the state to become wealthy.

Apparently SWAT Teams are Private Entities

The different tricks and tactics used by law enforcement agencies to bypass data access laws are always amusing to read about. But the recent trick used by Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams in Massachusetts deserves special recognition:

As it turns out, a number of SWAT teams in the Bay State are operated by what are called law enforcement councils, or LECs. These LECs are funded by several police agencies in a given geographic area and overseen by an executive board, which is usually made up of police chiefs from member police departments.

[…]

Some of these LECs have also apparently incorporated as 501(c)(3) organizations. And it’s here that we run into problems. According to the ACLU, the LECs are claiming that the 501(c)(3) status means that they’re private corporations, not government agencies. And therefore, they say they’re immune from open records requests.

My favorite part about government transparency laws getting passed isn’t the laws got passed but the scams developed by the government to ignore them. This particular scam is especially clever. By being private organizations these SWAT teams are immune from any and all government transparency laws.

Fans of history will likely have a long list of scams developed by individuals, corporations, and non-governmental organized crime syndicates. But time and time again the state manages to outdo all of those other petty scam artists. I guess having a monopoly on both writing and enforcing laws helps.

Make Way for His Majesty

Hear ye, hear ye, all subjects of the realm. His majesty, our king, Barack Obama will be here in Minnesota for two days. In recognition of his gloriousness both parks that he’s speaking at will be entirely shutdown in addition to the roads he will grace with his presence:

For starters, access to the boat launch was shut down at 10 p.m. Wednesday. And starting early Friday, no boats will be allowed on the lake. That means people who have sailboats there won’t be allowed to access them.

A playground, a beach, the rose garden and trails will be closed, as well as the restaurant next to the Band Shell.

[…]

Obama arrives in the Twin Cities early Thursday afternoon and will take part in an invitation-only town hall about 2 p.m. at Minnehaha Park, which will also be essentially shut down. Several roads near both parks also will be closed.

That was me trying to poke a little fun at the fact that one man has the power to shutdown entire parks and inconvenience the people who are forced to pay for them. It’s annoying but not the end of the world. This part, well, this part crosses the line:

People who live near the Band Shell, where Obama will speak Friday, will have to be escorted to and from their homes that morning.

[…]

On Friday, police will escort homeowners on Queen Avenue S. between 40th Street and 42nd Street to and from their homes from early morning through the end of the event.

Every reader knows how I feel about violence. I abhor it. But if some piece of shit in a cheap suit thinks they are going to escort me to and from my home they’re going to get a rude awakening when my fist makes contact with their face. There are some lines you do not cross. Making me a prisoner in my own home and requiring me to beg for permission to come and go as I please is one of them. I will not tolerate such bullshit. Fortunately for the Secret Service I don’t live there because if I did I would make it a point to walk around my neighborhood without permission or an escort.

Welcome to the freest country on Earth.

No Fly List Process Ruled Unconstitutional for Whatever That’s Worth

For whatever it’s worth a federal judge had determined that the process of adding names to the no fly list is unconstitutional:

PORTLAND, Ore. – In a landmark ruling, a federal judge struck down as unconstitutional the government’s procedures for people on the No Fly List to challenge their inclusion. The decision came in an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit brought on behalf of 13 Americans who found themselves on the list without any notice, reasons, or meaningful way to get off it.

The judge ordered the government to create a new process that remedies these shortcomings, calling the current process “wholly ineffective” and a violation of the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process. The ruling also granted a key request in the lawsuit, ordering the government to tell the ACLU’s clients why they are on the No Fly List and give them the opportunity to challenge their inclusion on the list before the judge.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is treating this like a major victory. But anybody who pays attention to this sort of thing knows that the government will just find another way to continue doing what it has been doing. Perhaps it will simply appeal the ruling and move it up until the Supreme Court rules it constitutional. Perhaps it will simply create a secret court, similar to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court, to determine who will be on the list. Perhaps the federal government will simply tell the judge to go fuck himself and not change a damn thing. Either way I highly doubt any actual change will come of this. We’re too much of a totalitarian state for pesky judges to make any effective changes.

On the upside this ruling does give a lot of people a warm and fuzzy feeling inside and that’s worth something.

Bypassing Canadian Gun Control Laws

Gun control is such an interesting thing to debate. This is because advocating for gun control is pointless. Laws, being human constructs, will always be ignored, bypasses, and worked around. Take Canada’s gun control laws. While they’re not as draconian as many other nations’ gun laws they are still pretty strict. Fortunately some innovative people have come up with a novel way to get verboten guns into the country, attach them to automobiles going across the Canadian border:

The gun smugglers called him “fool” – one of many Windsorites they used to unwittingly mule firearms over the border.

Buried in volumes of recently released Toronto police documents is the frightening revelation that Windsor gun runners hide firearms and GPS devices in the cars of unsuspecting Canadians to sneak them through customs.

[…]

Police say Porter and the people who worked with him scouted out cars with Ontario licence plates in Michigan parking lots. Once they found suitable vehicles, police said, they would hide guns and GPS devices under the bumpers. Chrysler Pacificas, Dakotas and Jeeps were among the cars they looked for.

Sometimes they would follow the car, watching as it crossed the border. Other times, they would let the GPS lead them to the person’s home.

Speaking from a smuggler’s point of view, this method is pretty low risk. If the guns are discovered your hands remain clean. You may lose the gun but so long as you get enough across to meet your needs you’re victorious. Speaking from an unsuspecting mule’s point of view, this sucks because you’re at risk of being prosecuted under Canada’s bullshit object restriction laws.

But this demonstrates, yet again, why attempting to control objects is a foolish. So long as those verboten objects are in demand some entrepreneur will find a way to fulfill that demand.