HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL.

Contents:

Rahm Emanual, Obama and H.R.3604
Obama makes Census a White House project
HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL.
Capt. Eric H. May : Geneva Conventions now, Nuremberg Principles later
David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007
Downloads

Rahm Emanual, Obama and H.R.3604 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 05:48:39 +0100 (CET) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: stewwebb@sierranv.net, stefangrossmann@t-online.de, too@slingshot.co.nz, timrifat@rvscience.com, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, palast@gregpalast.com, tom2@tomflocco.com, skolnick@ameritech.net, henry@savethemales.ca, leurenmoret@yahoo.com, prophecy@texemarrs.com, smith@iamthewitness.com, eric@iamthewitness.com, captainmay@prodigy.net, tarpley@tarpley.net, takingaim@pacbell.net, webmaster@rense.com, articles@davidicke.com, chamish@netvision.net.il, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, crescentandcross@gmail.com, tips@infowars.com, cloak.dagger@gmail.com, lennybloom@gmail.com, eric@vaticanassassins.org, email@spirituallysmart.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, vyzygoth@hotmail.com, alanwattcuttingthrough@yahoo.com, Tillawi@currentissues.tv, prothink@yahoo.com Subject: Rahm Emanual, Obama and H.R.3604 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="673810-1036121257-1225946919=:18818" Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: --673810-1036121257-1225946919=:18818 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Hi, This summer H.R.6304 was passed through congress, where the voting behavior of our fresh U.S. President elect was rather peculiar. See the four emails below for that. In the third email (H.R.6304-3) below someone on the Camel's Nose Blog even made the prediction that Rahm Emamuel would become the new Attorney General after Obama voted in favor for H.R.6304, after in turn Emanuel had endorsed Obama. Well that didn't happen but Rahm Emanuel [6] did become Chief of Staff for the U.S. President. Knowing what the implications are for H.R.6304, one should keep a very close eye on who becomes the new Attorney General. If Michael Bernard Mukasey stays on as U.S. Attorney General, then U.S. Citizins should be prepared for the worst of what might come. If its to be Rahm Emamuel and Michael Mukasey like above, its going to be a pigs game where Obama will know nothing about. People might disappear into death camps without no-one even knowing. Regards, Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net ==H.R.6304-4 ==Re: There Is No Fourth Amendment====================== From stock@stokkie.net Sat Jul 12 10:42:07 2008 +0200 Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:42:07 +0200 (CEST) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: stewwebb@sierranv.net, stefangrossmann@t-online.de, too@slingshot.co.nz, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, palast@gregpalast.com, tom@tomflocco.com, skolnick@ameritech.net, henry@savethemales.ca, leurenmoret@yahoo.com, prophecy@texemarrs.com, smith@iamthewitness.com, eric@iamthewitness.com, captainmay@prodigy.net, tarpley@tarpley.net, takingaim@pacbell.net, webmaster@rense.com, articles@davidicke.com, chamish@netvision.net.il, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, crescentandcross@gmail.com, tips@infowars.com, cloak.dagger@gmail.com, lennybloom@gmail.com, eric@vaticanassassins.org, email@spirituallysmart.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, vyzygoth@hotmail.com, alanwattcuttingthrough@yahoo.com, Tillawi@currentissues.tv, prothink@yahoo.com, lee@roguegovernment.com Subject: Re: There Is No Fourth Amendment Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: Hi, I had phoned in on Stadmillers Intel Report on July 8th, warning about the H.R. 6304 bill which was going to be sneaked through the Senate, after Daniel Ellsberg had been interviewed by Tim Ferriss over the Weekend [1]. But somehow John Stadmiller thought it was not that critical as it was just a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendment. Oh they are doing a physical searches? What are they gonna seize then? Your telephone or your computer? That wasn't clear to me either. But what this Bill sneakes through is the anihilation of the 4th Amendment [2] : "Skull and Bones member, war criminal and traitor George W. Bush recently signed HR 6304 or the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 into law that effectively makes the Fourth Amendment null and void. The new law disregards the protections guaranteed in the Fourth Amendment and allows the government to spy on people without a warrant so long as the government reasonably believes that they are gathering information on somebody from a foreign country. The government can reasonably believe whatever they want and not have to provide probable cause supported by an oath or affirmation to obtain a warrant before they engage in spying activities. It gives them a blank check to spy on whoever they please. It also eliminates any sort of oversight in the intelligence gathering process, and this is a dangerous proposition. The law also gives immunity to telecommunication companies from lawsuits pertaining to their prior cooperation in the unlawful spying programs implemented by the government. As expected, Bush and the supporters of this newly passed law are using the bogus excuse of the war on terror to undermine civil liberties. The terror war as has been documented time and time again is a fraud designed to setup a police state, justify illegal foreign wars and destroy the rule of law. The only reason there has been such a hurry to get this legislation passed into law is so Bush's buddies in these Fortune 100 companies won't get sued over their felonious activity. The ACLU is already planning to challenge the legality of this new law. Here's what the lead attorney from the ACLU had to say about this new law. 'The law lets government "conduct intrusive surveillance without ever telling a court who it intends to surveil, what phone lines and e-mail addresses it intends to monitor, where its surveillance targets are located, or why it's conducting the surveillance," said ACLU national security director Jameel Jaffer, the lead attorney in the suit.' Let's take a look at the text of the Fourth Amendment. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The Fourth Amendment requires that a warrant be issued only upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation. This law gives the federal government power to conduct surveillance without a warrant which means that it is unconstitutional and should be immediately thrown out by the judiciary. Amazingly the law itself references the Fourth Amendment several times even though it contains language that directly contradicts it. It essentially says that the government can spy on people without a warrant so long as it is reasonably believed you aren't spying on an American citizen. It also states that this sort of spying activity should be conducted in a manner consistent with the Fourth Amendment. This is ridiculous as the government cannot conduct the type of spying that is authorized in this law while conducting it in a manner consistent with the Fourth Amendment. It is a total contradiction." And that's not the entire story, as H.R. 6304 also removes our Elected President from any possible oversight into Whom /Why /and What is getting targeted by the new FISA act of 2008 : 6304 is a Jewish Powergrab ========================== Not only is H.R. 6304 the enactment of Worldwide STASI Surveillance , but more important, H.R. 6304 is a Jewish power-grab over the FISA Act of 1978. It turns out that the U.S. President's authority and signature is now completely bypassed if H.R. 6304 gets passed. In fact H.R. 6304 is a Power Grab over FISA by United States Attorney General Michael Bernard Mukasey himself. Mukasey is the second Jewish U.S. Attorney General, after Edward H. Levi, who was the 71st United States Attorney General from 1975 to 1977. It was during Edward H. Levi's reign as US Attorney General that the footwork for the "FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT" of 1978 was finalized. What is going on here? The Amendments made in H.R. 6304 all skip and strike out the paragraphs who give final authority to the U.S. President. The new final authority will be the U.S. Attorney General throughout the entire proposed FISA act. Here's an example on page 73 in the pdf : "SEC. 107. AMENDMENTS FOR PHYSICAL SEARCHES. (a) APPLICATIONS.Section 303 of the Foreign In- telligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1823) is amended -- (1) in subsection (a) (A) by striking paragraph (2);" From the original FISA act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1823) we read : § 1823. Application for order http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/usc_sec_50_00001823----000-.html "(2) the authority conferred on the Attorney General by the President and the approval of the Attorney General to make the application;" So the President's signature is safely and convenient skipped to get an Order issued. Hence the Attorney General (Mukasey) will basicly be working entirely independent from all possible oversight.... if H.R. 6304 gets passed. Besides the warning of Sen. Chris Dodd [3], who said that granting retroactive immunity would undermine the rule of law, The U.S. Presidents authority will be undermined as well. Basicly the new President Elect in 2009 will be a lame duck when it concerns FISA. Lee Rogers continues [2]: "Even though the ACLU is far from a perfect group, they do have the Constitution on their side. This new law is entirely unconstitutional and it should be thrown out. Hopefully the ACLU will succeed in accomplishing this. One thing is for sure, Bush and the gaggle of traitors in Congress that supported the passage of this bill into law should be thrown out of office immediately. If the war on terror is real, how come the nation's borders are wide open and Bush does nothing about the terrorist attacks currently taking place on the U.S.-Mexico border? Why does the Bush administration need to spy on people without a warrant, when they are not concerned with dangerous activity taking place in our own backyard? It is entirely hypocritical for Bush to use the phony terror war to justify the passage of this unlawful legislation. If he really wanted to stop terrorism a good first step would be for him to order the CIA otherwise known as the Cocaine Importing Agency to stop staging terrorist attacks. This new law is a bunch of garbage. It does not help fight terrorism and it does not protect civil liberties as Bush claims. Quite frankly, this new law sucks." Traitors in the US Congress huh? Someone wrote a followup on my "Conspiracy Theory" at the Camel's Nose blog [4] : "Egad! The Stasi AND the Jews?" Nijma Says: July 8, 2008 at 12:08 am Egad! The Stasi AND the Jews? Take a look at this time line on Daily KOS [5] and you will see that Obama changed his vote on FISA right after getting an endorsement from Rahm Emmanuel. If your conspiracy theory is correct, and Im not ruling out ANY conspiracy theories at this point, then U.S. Representative and Superdelgate from Illinois Rahm Emmanuel has an understanding with Obama to be the next Attorney General. Come back to this comment after January 20, 2009, and see if it was a prophecy." Well i sure hope for the future that the show hosts at RBN identify real threats when someone calls in and warns about them. Turns out that more people had called in that day trying to warn about H.R. 6304. Best Regards, Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net [1] "What Every American Needs to Know (and Do) About FISA Before Tuesday" * Tim Ferriss interviews Daniel Ellsberg about H.R. 6304, June 7th, 2008, interview held Sunday evening, July 6, 2008 http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/ http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/?s=Daniel+Ellsberg&x=22&y=11 [2] "There Is No Fourth Amendment" by Lee Rogers, 07-11-2008 http://www.roguegovernment.com http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=10609 [3] FISA Amendments Act of 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FISA_Amendments_Act_of_2008 [4] "Egad! The Stasi AND the Jews?" by Nijma, July 8, 2008 at 12:08 am http://camelsnose.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/senator ... [5] "Obama's FISA reversal and the FISA timeline" by wigwam Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 10:11:57 AM PDT http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/7/115227/7027/466/547691 [6] "Journalist Reaches From Grave To Nail Rahm" "Excerpts From Archived News Investigations" by The Late Sherman H. Skolnick (July 13 1930 ­ May 21, 2006) 11-9-8 http://www.rense.com/general84/nodm.htm ==H.R.6304-3 ==Obama supports H.R. 6304 after Rahm Emmanuel endorses Obama== From stock@stokkie.net Tue Jul 8 18:47:44 2008 +0200 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:47:44 +0200 (CEST) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: stewwebb@sierranv.net, stefangrossmann@t-online.de, too@slingshot.co.nz, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, palast@gregpalast.com, tom@tomflocco.com, skolnick@ameritech.net, henry@savethemales.ca, leurenmoret@yahoo.com, prophecy@texemarrs.com, smith@iamthewitness.com, eric@iamthewitness.com, captainmay@prodigy.net, tarpley@tarpley.net, takingaim@pacbell.net, webmaster@rense.com, articles@davidicke.com, chamish@netvision.net.il, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, crescentandcross@gmail.com, tips@infowars.com, cloak.dagger@gmail.com, lennybloom@gmail.com, eric@vaticanassassins.org, email@spirituallysmart.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, vyzygoth@hotmail.com, alanwattcuttingthrough@yahoo.com, Tillawi@currentissues.tv, prothink@yahoo.com Subject: Obama supports H.R. 6304 after Rahm Emmanuel endorses Obama In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: Hi, From the Camel's Nose blog : http://camelsnose.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/senator ... "Egad! The Stasi AND the Jews?" Nijma Says: July 8, 2008 at 12:08 am Egad! The Stasi AND the Jews? Take a look at this time line on Daily KOS [1] and you will see that Obama changed his vote on FISA right after getting an endorsement from Rahm Emmanuel. If your conspiracy theory is correct, and Im not ruling out ANY conspiracy theories at this point, then U.S. Representative and Superdelgate from Illinois Rahm Emmanuel has an understanding with Obama to be the next Attorney General. Come back to this comment after January 20, 2009, and see if it was a prophecy." Well this is enough evidence to be very worried. Cheers, Robert PS. [1] "Obama's FISA reversal and the FISA timeline" by wigwam Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 10:11:57 AM PDT http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/7/115227/7027/466/547691 On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Robert M. Stockmann wrote: > Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:41:52 +0200 (CEST) > From: Robert M. Stockmann > To: stewwebb@sierranv.net, stefangrossmann@t-online.de, too@slingshot.co.nz, > wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, palast@gregpalast.com, > tom@tomflocco.com, skolnick@ameritech.net, henry@savethemales.ca, > leurenmoret@yahoo.com, prophecy@texemarrs.com, smith@iamthewitness.com, > eric@iamthewitness.com, captainmay@prodigy.net, tarpley@tarpley.net, > takingaim@pacbell.net, webmaster@rense.com, articles@davidicke.com, > chamish@netvision.net.il, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, > crescentandcross@gmail.com, tips@infowars.com, cloak.dagger@gmail.com, > lennybloom@gmail.com, eric@vaticanassassins.org, > email@spirituallysmart.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, vyzygoth@hotmail.com, > alanwattcuttingthrough@yahoo.com, Tillawi@currentissues.tv, > prothink@yahoo.com > Subject: Re: H.R. 6304 is a Jewish Powergrab > > > Hi, > > Not only is H.R. 6304 the enactment of Worldwide STASI Surveillance , > but more important, H.R. 6304 is a Jewish power-grab over the FISA > Act of 1978. It turns out that the U.S. President's authority and > signature is now completely bypassed if H.R. 6304 gets passed. > > In fact H.R. 6304 is a Power Grab over FISA by United States Attorney > General Michael Bernard Mukasey himself. > > Mukasey is the second Jewish U.S. Attorney General, after Edward H. > Levi, who was the 71st United States Attorney General from 1975 to > 1977. It was during Edward H. Levi's reign as US Attorney General that > the footwork for the "FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT" of 1978 > was finalized. > > What is going on here? The Amendments made in H.R. 6304 all skip and > strike out the paragraphs who give final authority to the U.S. > President. The new final authority will be the U.S. Attorney General > throughout the entire proposed FISA act. Here's an example on page 73 > in the pdf : > > "SEC. 107. AMENDMENTS FOR PHYSICAL SEARCHES. > (a) APPLICATIONS.Section 303 of the Foreign In- > telligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1823) is > amended -- > (1) in subsection (a) > (A) by striking paragraph (2);" > > From the original FISA act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1823) we read : > > § 1823. Application for order > http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/usc_sec_50_00001823----000-.html > > "(2) the authority conferred on the Attorney General by the > President and the approval of the Attorney General to make the > application;" > > So the President's signature is safely and convenient skipped to get an > Order issued. Hence the Attorney General (Mukasey) will basicly be > working entirely independent from all possible oversight.... if H.R. > 6304 gets passed. > > Besides the warning of Sen. Chris Dodd [1], who said that granting > retroactive immunity would undermine the rule of law, The U.S. > Presidents authority will be undermined as well. Basicly the new > President Elect in 2009 will be a lame duck when it concerns FISA. > > > This one needs to be stopped. See also : > > > > "What Every American Needs to Know (and Do) About FISA > > Before Tuesday" > > * Tim Ferriss interviews Daniel Ellsberg about H.R. 6304 > > http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/ > > > > "ALL AMERICANS: Go to the EFF website here and put in your zipcode to > > find your Senators phone number. Call them and read the short script > > on the same page. If no answer, click the link at the bottom of the > > page to e-mail them." > > https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?alertId=389&pg=makeACall > > > > "Senator Obama - Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity - Get FISA Right" > > http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/SenatorObama-PleaseVoteAgainstFISA > > > > Regards, > > > > Robert > > > > [1] FISA Amendments Act of 2008 > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FISA_Amendments_Act_of_2008 > -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net ==H.R.6304-2 ==Re: H.R. 6304 is a Jewish Powergrab===================== From stock@stokkie.net Tue Jul 8 01:41:52 2008 +0200 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:41:52 +0200 (CEST) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: stewwebb@sierranv.net, stefangrossmann@t-online.de>, too@slingshot.co.nz, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, palast@gregpalast.com, tom@tomflocco.com, skolnick@ameritech.net, henry@savethemales.ca, leurenmoret@yahoo.com, prophecy@texemarrs.com, smith@iamthewitness.com, eric@iamthewitness.com, captainmay@prodigy.net, tarpley@tarpley.net, takingaim@pacbell.net, webmaster@rense.com, articles@davidicke.com, chamish@netvision.net.il, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, crescentandcross@gmail.com, tips@infowars.com, cloak.dagger@gmail.com, lennybloom@gmail.com, eric@vaticanassassins.org, email@spirituallysmart.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, vyzygoth@hotmail.com, alanwattcuttingthrough@yahoo.com, Tillawi@currentissues.tv, prothink@yahoo.com Subject: Re: H.R. 6304 is a Jewish Powergrab In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Status: RO X-Status: A X-Keywords: Hi, Not only is H.R. 6304 the enactment of Worldwide STASI Surveillance , but more important, H.R. 6304 is a Jewish power-grab over the FISA Act of 1978. It turns out that the U.S. President's authority and signature is now completely bypassed if H.R. 6304 gets passed. In fact H.R. 6304 is a Power Grab over FISA by United States Attorney General Michael Bernard Mukasey himself. Mukasey is the second Jewish U.S. Attorney General, after Edward H. Levi, who was the 71st United States Attorney General from 1975 to 1977. It was during Edward H. Levi's reign as US Attorney General that the footwork for the "FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT" of 1978 was finalized. What is going on here? The Amendments made in H.R. 6304 all skip and strike out the paragraphs who give final authority to the U.S. President. The new final authority will be the U.S. Attorney General throughout the entire proposed FISA act. Here's an example on page 73 in the pdf : "SEC. 107. AMENDMENTS FOR PHYSICAL SEARCHES. (a) APPLICATIONS.Section 303 of the Foreign In- telligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1823) is amended -- (1) in subsection (a) (A) by striking paragraph (2);" From the original FISA act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1823) we read : § 1823. Application for order http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/usc_sec_50_00001823----000-.html "(2) the authority conferred on the Attorney General by the President and the approval of the Attorney General to make the application;" So the President's signature is safely and convenient skipped to get an Order issued. Hence the Attorney General (Mukasey) will basicly be working entirely independent from all possible oversight.... if H.R. 6304 gets passed. Besides the warning of Sen. Chris Dodd [1], who said that granting retroactive immunity would undermine the rule of law, The U.S. Presidents authority will be undermined as well. Basicly the new President Elect in 2009 will be a lame duck when it concerns FISA. > This one needs to be stopped. See also : > > "What Every American Needs to Know (and Do) About FISA > Before Tuesday" > * Tim Ferriss interviews Daniel Ellsberg about H.R. 6304 > http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/ > > "ALL AMERICANS: Go to the EFF website here and put in your zipcode to > find your Senators phone number. Call them and read the short script > on the same page. If no answer, click the link at the bottom of the > page to e-mail them." > https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?alertId=389&pg=makeACall > > "Senator Obama - Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity - Get FISA Right" > http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/SenatorObama-PleaseVoteAgainstFISA > > Regards, > > Robert > [1] FISA Amendments Act of 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FISA_Amendments_Act_of_2008 -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net ==H.R.6304-1 ==H.R.6304 : WorldWide STASI Surveillance================ From stock@stokkie.net Mon Jul 7 21:29:46 2008 +0200 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 21:29:45 +0200 (CEST) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: stewwebb@sierranv.net, stefangrossmann@t-online.de>, too@slingshot.co.nz>, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com>, palast@gregpalast.com>, tom@tomflocco.com, skolnick@ameritech.net, henry@savethemales.ca>, leurenmoret@yahoo.com, prophecy@texemarrs.com>, smith@iamthewitness.com, eric@iamthewitness.com>, captainmay@prodigy.net, tarpley@tarpley.net>, takingaim@pacbell.net, webmaster@rense.com, articles@davidicke.com, chamish@netvision.net.il, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, crescentandcross@gmail.com, tips@infowars.com, cloak.dagger@gmail.com, lennybloom@gmail.com, eric@vaticanassassins.org, email@spirituallysmart.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, vyzygoth@hotmail.com, alanwattcuttingthrough@yahoo.com, Tillawi@currentissues.tv, prothink@yahoo.com Subject: H.R. 6304 : WorldWide STASI Surveillance Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Status: RO X-Status: A X-Keywords: Dear Fellow World Citizins, The following bill is supposed to get passed through the Senate on Tuesday July 8, 2008 : "HR6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008" http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.06304: This act will give unlimited Global STASI Powers to the U.S. President. Even Barack Obama seems to have re-aligned himself to support this bill and vote it through the Senate... So what is this Bill about ? With H.R.6304, STASI House Searches now also comes Overseas! : "SEC. 702. PROCEDURES FOR TARGETING CERTAIN PER- SONS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES OTHER THAN UNITED STATES PERSONS. (a) AUTHORIZATION. -- Not withstanding any other provision of law, upon the issuance of an order in accord- ance with subsection (i)(3) or a determination under sub- section (c)(2), the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence may authorize jointly, for a period of up to 1 year from the effective date of the authoriza- tion, the targeting of persons reasonably believed to be lo- cated outside the United States to acquire foreign intel- ligence information. " And they come unwarrented and if you survive, you might get harmed. But you CANNOT sue them as SEC. 107 has been revised. In short it means "If they violate your body through search, and they find nothing, YOU CANNOT SUE THEM in court" "SEC. 107. AMENDMENTS FOR PHYSICAL SEARCHES. "(5) In the event that such application for approval is denied, or in any other case where the physical search 77 is terminated and no order is issued approving the phys- ical search, no information obtained or evidence derived from such physical search shall be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing, or other pro- ceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, office, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of the United States, a State, or political subdivision thereof, and no information concerning any United States person acquired from such physical search shall subsequently be used or disclosed in any other man- ner by Federal officers or employees without the consent of such person, except with the approval of the Attorney General if the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily harm to any person. "(6) The Attorney General shall assess compliance with the requirements of paragraph (5).". This one needs to be stopped. See also : "What Every American Needs to Know (and Do) About FISA Before Tuesday" * Tim Ferriss interviews Daniel Ellsberg about H.R. 6304 http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/ "ALL AMERICANS: Go to the EFF website here and put in your zipcode to find your Senators phone number. Call them and read the short script on the same page. If no answer, click the link at the bottom of the page to e-mail them." https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?alertId=389&pg=makeACall "Senator Obama - Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity - Get FISA Right" http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/SenatorObama-PleaseVoteAgainstFISA Regards, Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net --673810-1036121257-1225946919=:18818 Content-Type: APPLICATION/pdf; name="HR6304pcs.txt.pdf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64 Content-ID: Content-Description: Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="HR6304pcs.txt.pdf" --673810-1036121257-1225946919=:18818--

Obama makes Census a White House project Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:55:24 +0100 (CET) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: stewwebb@sierranv.net, skolnick@ameritech.net, tom2@tomflocco.com, too@slingshot.co.nz, timrifat@rvscience.com, prophecy@texemarrs.com, shanktalk@yahoo.com, two.ifbysea@yahoo.com, stefangrossmann@t-online.de, palast@gregpalast.com, henry@savethemales.ca, leurenmoret@yahoo.com, rick458@cox.net, stangfeedback@gmail.com, mike@radioactivetalk.com, smith@iamthewitness.com, eric@iamthewitness.com, ognir2@gmail.com, prothink@yahoo.com, captainmay@prodigy.net, tarpley@tarpley.net, takingaim@pacbell.net, eirns@larouchepub.com, info@larouchepac.com, webmaster@rense.com, articles@davidicke.com, chamish@netvision.net.il, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, crescentandcross@gmail.com, Tillawi@currentissues.tv, tips@infowars.com, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, cloak.dagger@gmail.com, lennybloom@gmail.com, eric@vaticanassassins.org, email@spirituallysmart.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, vyzygoth@hotmail.com, alanwattcuttingthrough@yahoo.com Subject: Obama makes Census a White House project Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: Hi, Throughout history, as recorded in the bible, and later writings, 'Census' activities by Rulers were most of the time inspired by Satan : 1st Chronicles 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel. Most certainly in poor countries where its most valuable assets are the people themselves. The current move by Obama to move Census to the White House is in particular interesting as the US Census Bureau had already been setup [1]. Why would Census become a private for White House Eyes only operation? As i reported earlier how HR6304 basicly annihilated the Fourth Amendment [2], it also meant that total oversight and control for FISA was delegated down into the hands of the U.S. Attorney General giving him unlimited Global STASI Powers. Now, .... Eric Holder is not the kind of guy to gleam and steam behind a Census screen to gather information for a silent HR6304 Rendition act. Obama, although being US President, will never know the full extend of how HR6304 is carried through, either ... Remembering how Obama changed his vote on HR6304 when Rahm Emanuel gave his endorsement, I guess we are now left with one happy son of a Israeli terrorist in the White House, who sure will be interested in a live Census screen update. Regards, Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net [1] GOP Sounds Alarm Over Obama Decision to Move Census to White House FOXNews.com, Monday, February 09, 2009 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/09/gop-sounds-alarm-obama-decision-census-white-house/ http://www.infowars.com/gop-sounds-alarm-over-obama-decision-to-move-census-to-white-house/ [2] Rahm Emanual, Obama and H.R.3604 http://crashrecovery.org/hamdan/#HR3604 HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL. No. 05184. Argued March 28, 2006 Decided June 29, 2006 ( A good tip when reading legal proceedings is to install and use gnome-dictionary, which is a part of the gnome-utils-2.6.2-4mdk on Mandrake/Mandriva desktops. If you don't know which package it is just try to start /usr/bin/gnome-dictionary. ) From stock@stokkie.net Sun Jul 2 15:25:16 2006 +0200 Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 15:25:16 +0200 (CEST) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: letters@washpost.com, letters@nytimes.com, letters@latimes.com, editor@usatoday.com, info@miamitimesonline.com, news@miamitimesonline.com, HeraldEd@herald.com, journal@c-span.org Subject: Re: Top Ten Things You Can Say About Hamdan Case Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0607021521060.6605-100000@hubble.stokkie.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Dear Editors, After reading "bench conference" by Andrew Cohen, "Top Ten Things You Can Say About Hamdan Case", top_ten_things_to_remember_abo.html I was surprised how such a important ruling was being put away with "It's the worst decision ever." I however conclude the opposite. The case of Hamdan vs Rumsfeld has been heating up on the judicial stove since Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni national, has been in custody since June 2002 at an American prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The bad thing for Rummy and his crownies is that the coffee inside that kettle today has become undrinkable. As we have seen before with the Downingstreet Memo's where : "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." We today can observe that The Government's and Congress' conduct of legislative proposals have been fixed around this very particular law case, the case of Hamdan vs Rumsfeld [1]. This sounds unbelievable but its the undeniable truth. Last week the supreme court has come to the exact same conclusion. What had happened? Mister Hamdam had been Osama bin Ladens "bodyguard and personal driver", and had been accused of undisclosed charges, even mentioning the word conspiracy. On Nov 8, 2004, after Hamdam had filed multiple petitions for writs of habeas corpus, The District Court of Columbia finally granted Hamdans request. Habeas corpus : L. you may have the body. (Law) A writ having for its object to bring a party before a court or judge; especially, one to inquire into the cause of a person's imprisonment or detention by another, with the view to protect the right to personal liberty; also, one to bring a prisoner into court to testify in a pending trial. --Bouvier. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit however reversed that request in 2005. It was about the same time when the Government passed the so-called Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA). A very controversial piece of legislative text, as we will find out. On November 7, 2005, The Supreme Court however granted certiorari in the Hamdam case. Note: A certiorari is the correct process to remove the proceedings of a court in which cases are tried in a manner different from the course of the common law, as of county commissioners. It is also used as an auxiliary process in order to obtain a full return to some other process. --Bouvier. From here on the SUPREME COURT Ruling reads as follows : Page 15 - 22 inside [1]: "On February 13, 2006, the Government filed a motion to dismiss the writ of certiorari. The ground cited for dismissal was the recently enacted Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), Pub. L. 109148, 119 Stat. 2739. We postponed our ruling on that motion pending argument on the merits, 546 U. S. ___ (2006), and now deny it. The DTA, which was signed into law on December 30, 2005, addresses a broad swath of subjects related to detainees. It places restrictions on the treatment and interrogation of detainees in U.S. custody, and it furnishes procedural protections for U.S. personnel accused of engaging in improper interrogation. DTA §§10021004, 119 Stat. 27392740. It also sets forth certain "PROCEDURES FOR STATUS REVIEW OF DETAINEES OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES." §1005, id., at 2740. Subsections (a) through (d) of §1005 direct the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress the procedures being used by CSRTs to determine the proper classification of detainees held in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and to adopt certain safeguards as part of those procedures. (CSRT : Combatant Status Review Tribunal) Subsection (e) of §1005, which is entitled "JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DETENTION OF ENEMY COMBATANTS," supplies the basis for the Government's jurisdictional argument. The subsection contains three numbered paragraphs. The first paragraph amends the judicial code as follows: "(1) IN GENERAL.--Section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: . . . . . "(e) Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider "(1) an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; or "(2) any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention by the Department of Defense of an alien at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who-- "'(A) is currently in military custody; or "'(B) has been determined by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant.'" §1005(e), id., at 27412742. Paragraph (2) of subsection (e) vests in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit the "exclusive jurisdiction to determine the validity of any final decision of a [CSRT] that an alien is properly designated as an enemy combatant." Paragraph (2) also delimits the scope of that review. See §§1005(e)(2)(C)(i)(ii), id., at 2742. Paragraph (3) mirrors paragraph (2) in structure, but governs judicial review of final decisions of military commissions, not CSRTs. It vests in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit "exclusive jurisdiction to determine the validity of any final decision rendered pursuant to Military Commission Order No. 1, dated August 31, 2005 (or any successor military order)." §1005(e)(3)(A), id., at 2743.2 Review is as of right for any alien sentenced to death or a term of imprisonment of 10 years or more, but is at the Court of Appeals' discretion in all other cases. The scope of review is limited to the following inquiries: "(i) whether the final decision [of the military commission] was consistent with the standards and procedures specified in the military order referred to in subparagraph (A); and "(ii) to the extent the Constitution and laws of the United States are applicable, whether the use of such standards and procedures to reach the final decision is consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States." §1005(e)(3)(D), ibid. Finally, §1005 contains an "effective date" provision, which reads as follows: "(1) IN GENERAL.--This section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act. "(2) REVIEW OF COMBATANT STATUS TRIBUNAL AND MILITARY COMMISSION DECISIONS.--Paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (e) shall apply with respect to any claim whose review is governed by one of such paragraphs and that is pending on or after the date of the enactment of this Act." §1005(h), id., at 2743 2744.3 The Act is silent about whether paragraph (1) of subsection (e) "shall apply" to claims pending on the date of enactment. The Government argues that §§1005(e)(1) and 1005(h) had the immediate effect, upon enactment, of repealing federal jurisdiction not just over detainee habeas actions yet to be filed but also over any such actions then pending in any federal courtincluding this Court. Accordingly, it argues, we lack jurisdiction to review the Court of Appeals' decision below. Hamdan objects to this theory on both constitutional and statutory grounds. Principal among his constitutional arguments is that the Government's preferred reading raises grave questions about Congress' authority to impinge upon this Courtes appellate jurisdiction, particularly in habeas cases. Support for this argument is drawn from Ex parte Yerger, 8 Wall. 85 (1869), in which, having explained that "the denial to this court of appellate jurisdiction" to consider an original writ of habeas corpus would "greatly weaken the efficacy of the writ," id., at 102103, we held that Congress would not be presumed to have effected such denial absent an unmistakably clear statement to the contrary. See id., at 104105; see also Felker v. Turpin, 518 U. S. 651 (1996); Durousseau v. United States, 6 Cranch 307, 314 (1810) (opinion for the Court by Marshall, C. J.) (The "appellate powers of this court" are not created by statute but are "given by the constitution"); United States v. Klein, 13 Wall. 128 (1872). Cf. Ex parte McCardle, 7 Wall. 506, 514 (1869) (holding that Congress had validly foreclosed one avenue of appellate review where its repeal of habeas jurisdiction, reproduced in the margin,4 could not have been "a plainer instance of positive exception"). Hamdan also suggests that, if the Governments reading is correct, Congress has unconstitutionally suspended the writ of habeas corpus. We find it unnecessary to reach either of these arguments. Ordinary principles of statutory construction suffice to rebut the Government's theory --at least in sofar as this case, which was pending at the time the DTA was enacted, is concerned. The Government acknowledges that only paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (e) are expressly made applicable to pending cases, see §1005(h)(2), 119 Stat. 27432744, but argues that the omission of paragraph (1) from the scope of that express statement is of no moment. This is so, we are told, because Congress' failure to expressly reserve federal courts' jurisdiction over pending cases erects a presumption against jurisdiction, and that presumption is rebutted by neither the text nor the legislative history of the DTA. The first part of this argument is not entirely without support in our precedents. We have in the past "applied intervening statutes conferring or ousting jurisdiction, whether or not jurisdiction lay when the underlying conduct occurred or when the suit was filed." Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U. S. 244, 274 (1994) (citing Bruner v. United States, 343 U. S. 112 (1952); Hallowell v. Commons, 239 U. S. 506 (1916)); see Republic of Austria v. Altmann, 541 U. S. 677, 693 (2004). But the "presumption" that these cases have applied is more accurately viewed as the nonapplication of another presumption-- viz., the presumption against retroactivity--in certain limited circumstances.5 If a statutory provision "would operate retroactively" as applied to cases pending at the time the provision was enacted, then "our traditional presumption teaches that it does not govern absent clear congressional intent favoring such a result." Landgraf, 511 U. S., at 280. We have explained, however, that, unlike other intervening changes in the law, a jurisdiction-conferring or jurisdiction-stripping statute usually "takes away no substantive right but simply changes the tribunal that is to hear the case." Hallowell, 239 U. S., at 508. If that is truly all the statute does, no retroactivity problem arises because the change in the law does not "impair rights a party possessed when he acted, increase a party's liability for past conduct, or impose new duties with respect to transactions already completed." Landgraf, 511 U. S., at 280.6 And if a new rule has no retroactive effect, the presumption against retroactivity will not prevent its application to a case that was already pending when the new rule was enacted. That does not mean, however, that all jurisdiction-stripping provisions--or even all such provisions that truly lack retroactive effect--must apply to cases pending at the time of their enactment. enactment.7 "[N]ormal rules of construction," including a contextual reading of the statutory language, may dictate otherwise. Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U. S. 320, 326 (1997).8 A familiar principle of statutory construction, relevant both in Lindh and here, is that a negative inference may be drawn from the exclusion of language from one statutory provision that is included in other provisions of the same statute. See id., at 330; see also, e.g., Russello v. United States, 464 U. S. 16, 23 (1983) ("[W]here Congress includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another section of the same Act, it is generally presumed that Congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate inclusion or exclusiona"). The Court in Lindh relied on this reasoning to conclude that certain limitations on the availability of habeas relief imposed by AEDPA applied only to (AEDPA : the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) cases filed after that statute's effective date. Congress' failure to identify the temporal reach of those limitations, which governed noncapital cases, stood in contrast to its express command in the same legislation that new rules governing habeas petitions in capital cases "apply to cases pending on or after the date of enactment." §107(c), 110 Stat. 1226; see Lindh, 521 U. S., at 329330. That contrast, combined with the fact that the amendments at issue "affect[ed] substantive entitlement to relief," id., at 327, warranted drawing a negative inference. A like inference follows a fortiori from Lindh in this case. "If . . . Congress was reasonably concerned to ensure that [§§1005(e)(2) and (3)] be applied to pending cases, it should have been just as concerned about [§1005(e)(1)], unless it had the different intent that the latter [section] not be applied to the general run of pending cases." Id., at 329. If anything, the evidence of deliberate omission is stronger here than it was in Lindh. In Lindh, the provisions to be contrasted had been drafted separately but were later "joined together and . . . considered simultaneously when the language raising the implication was inserted." Id., at 330. We observed that Congress' tandem review and approval of the two sets of provisions strengthened the presumption that the relevant omission was deliberate." This sure reads as if the Dick, Donald, George and GOP gang have been cought with their pants down. Create a law which should become a Retroactive law, i.e. DTA 2005, but only in favor of the Government and where the enemy combatant's retroactive rights are conveniently ommitted. It also allows the conclusion that the United States Constitution and Statures simply cannot be denied or put away by introducing some fast drafted amendment like the 2005 DTA act. This Supreme Ruling might even lead the way to denounce the U.S. Patriot Act and its decendants. It only takes a couple of brave men who are detained and are willing to stand up. It sure is interesting to know who actually are the Laywers for Salim Ahmed Hamdan inside this case. Yours Sincerely, Robert M. Stockman [1] HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL. No. 05184. Argued March 28, 2006 Decided June 29, 2006 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-184.pdf -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net Capt. Eric H. May : Geneva Conventions now, Nuremberg Principles later From captainmay@prodigy.net Sun Jul 02 15:47:51 2006 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stock@stokkie.net Received: (qmail 17106 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2006 15:47:48 -0000 Received: from web81806.mail.mud.yahoo.com (68.142.207.171) by stokkie.demon.nl with SMTP; 2 Jul 2006 15:47:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 93381 invoked by uid 60001); 2 Jul 2006 15:47:14 -0000 Message-ID: 20060702154714.93379.qmail@web81806.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: from [71.143.132.79] by web81806.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 02 Jul 2006 08:47:14 PDT Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 08:47:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Captain May Subject: Hamdan vs Rumsfeld (Geneva Conventions now, Nuremberg Principles later) To: "Robert M. Stockmann" In-Reply-To: Pine.LNX.4.44.0607020540040.17972-100000@hubble.stokkie.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Dear Mr. Stockmann, I think the most striking conclusion of last week's Supreme Court decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld is that the executive branch -- all the way to GWB -- is subject to the Geneva Convention. Further, I think it but a step to go from the pertinence of the Geneva Convention to the Principles of Nuremberg. I'm in favor of both extensions of law -- and of common sense -- in the atrocious matter of Gitmo, then later in Abu Ghraib (inter alia) in Iraq and elsewhere, all directed by the current tenet of the White House. These abuses were nothing more or less than the extension of Israeli Mossad torture tactics to the Israel-Lobby-dominated US Dept. of Defense, winked at by the Israel-Lobby-dominated US media. Were it not for the fact that the Israel Lobby is behind it all, the hue and cry (especially by US Jews) would have been deafening. After all (they should argue but curiously don't), what the Neocons are rationalizing as correct measures against the Arabs in the current era is nothing more or less than what the Nazis rationalized as correct measures against the Jews in a former era. I'm of the firm opinion that until the Israel Lobby -- Zionism is my preferred word, but I bow to the current lexicon -- is pointed out as the key player in the Nazification of US policy, there will be no substantial change, and the egregious techniques now introduced as protection for the American People will be used against the American People. This is always the way of emerging fascism, isn't it? That the Israel Lobby won't condemn it argues strongly that they are behind it. As those who have followed my three-year mission of conscience have learned, my background in military/media matters (military intelligence and public affairs) has given me the knack of seeing where things are going well in advance. This was the case in the matter of Abu Ghraib and the war crimes we are committing there, as I pointed out what I thought was happening and whither it tended to my senior Ghost Troop officer, Ambassador Chase Untermeyer, currently the Bush League point man in Qatar (CENTCOM HQ). I close with a couple of links from September, 2003. I wrote what I wrote at the time of the set-up of Muslim chaplain Captain James Yee, who was accused of treason when I believed his aim was to report the true nature of things to the US media (which was probably what betrayed him to the Bush League). Both are part of my four-volume report to Congress on media/military abuses in connection with the Battle of Baghdad Cover-up (BOBCUP): Email to Chase Untermeyer (22 Sept. 03): http://www.ghosttroop.net/untermeyersep22.htm Op-ed on Captain Yee & Captain Dreyfus (24 Sept. 03): http://www.ghosttroop.net/yeedreyfus.htm Please forward these links to such as may find them of interest. Lord knows, the US media isn't going to do any digging or reporting into the reality of things, so we have to continue to do it ourselves! Best regards, Captain Eric H. May, MI/PAO, USA CO, Ghost Troop, 3/7 Cybercav+ Mission of Conscience / Patriots in Action PS: I hope you have seen the column Ghost Troop published in Bush's hometown Lone Star Iconoclast (in Crawford), which warns of a Bush League terror event (probably in Texas) before the elections: http://www.lonestaricon.com/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?a=248&z=37 Captain Eric H. May's GHOST TROOP Audio interviews with Cloak & Dagger http://crashrecovery.org/Capt.Eric.H.May/archive.html Captain Eric May's Archive on news manipulation http://www.amfirstbooks.com/.../may,_captain_eric/Capt._Eric_H._May_index.html http://www.amfirstbooks.com/ Captain Eric H. May's articles at Price of Liberty http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/may.htm Archives of Captain Eric H. May at Price of Liberty http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/arc_may.htm [1] HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL. No. 05184. Argued March 28, 2006 Decided June 29, 2006 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-184.pdf [2] Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Petitioner v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, et al. by Joshua Friedman http://www.hamdanvrumsfeld.com/ David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 03:35:49 +0100 (CET) From: "Robert M. Stockmann" To: cloak.dagger@gmail.com, stefangrossmann@t-online.de, too@slingshot.co.nz, skolnick@ameritech.net, eric@vaticanassassins.org, tips@infowars.com, prisonplanetweb@hotmail.com, tarpley@tarpley.net, tom@tomflocco.com, takingaim@pacbell.net, stewwebb@sierranv.net, prophecy@texemarrs.com, deadlinelive@yahoo.com, webmaster@rense.com, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, captainmay@prodigy.net, palast@gregpalast.com, henry@savethemales.ca, leurenmoret@yahoo.com, michaelcollinspiper1960@yahoo.com, chamish@netvision.net.il Subject: David's Law ?? Message-ID: Hi, As Mike Piper already correctly mentioned, a new House Bill has been introduced : HR.254, a Law on Hate Speech. Now, why would the greatest Nation on Earth need a Bill on hate Speech? Maybe the USA ain't that great anymore, and to fit the economic ends they insert this bill? A law on hate speech is more of a nasty hack to have society "behave" in a orderly fashion when being in times of economic downturn. These kind of laws are only to "fight" the results of grim times, whereas nothing is done, ON PURPOSE, to solve the real cause of the economic downturn itself. Last december Tim Rifat, a British Intelligence and Geo Political Analyst with rather unconventional views, probably described it best : http://crashrecovery.org/fatherfeeney/www/images/holohoax.gif http://www.fatherfeeney.org/www/images/holohoax.gif "In Western Europe, a neo-Stalin state, its illegal to discuss history. Anyone starting a discussion will be arrested like David Irving. In Europe there's law which forbid discussing history e.g. the holocaust. We now have a Zionist empire of Europe where history is written down as law and one is forbidden by law to discuss it." Some say that Hate Speech Law, as a cure, is far far worse as the disease itself. This kind of legislature can only feed on the back of the population when Government itself keeps its eyes shut to : - federal and state sponsored crime - corruption - usury - tax extortion, - bribes - swindle etc. which harm people inside their spending capacity. Hence people will try to find out whats really going on. Sadly enough, history has shown that, the moment people find out whats really going on inside Government, hate speech laws will prevent them from telling truth, where at the same time the deceptive media are most brilliant in presenting false scape goats. Jewish survivors from nazi germany know all too well about this. Again, Hate Speech Law is a phenomenon which typically arises when corruption has become the norm inside Government. A perfect example of this is the former U.S.S.R. under Stalin. Hence my conclusion about this bill is that : HATE SPEECH LAW IS UN-AMERICAN Its even UN-ISRAEL or UN-ZIONIST, or ANTI JEW! David's Law should be called here by its real name : STALIN's LAW OF HATE SPEECH So Dear Representives : Please pass this piece of rag into the binster.. Here comes the full text of the Bill as a warning for future attempts to be swiftly identified and removed : http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c110query.html (Select "Bill Number" and search for HR254) "------------------------------------------------------------------ David's Law (Introduced in House) HR 254 IH 110th CONGRESS 1st Session H.R. 254 To enhance Federal enforcement of hate crimes, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 5, 2007 Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary ------------------------------------------------------------------ A BILL To enhance Federal enforcement of hate crimes, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007' or `David's Law'. SEC. 2. FINDINGS. Congress finds that-- (1) the incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem; (2) such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive; (3) existing Federal law is inadequate to address this problem; (4) such violence affects interstate commerce in many ways, including-- (A) by impeding the movement of members of targeted groups and forcing such members to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence; and (B) by preventing members of targeted groups from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment or participating in other commercial activity; (5) perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence; (6) instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence; (7) such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce; (8) violence motivated by bias that is a relic of slavery can constitute badges and incidents of slavery; (9) although many local jurisdictions have attempted to respond to the challenges posed by such violence, the problem is sufficiently serious, widespread, and interstate in scope to warrant Federal intervention to assist such jurisdictions; and (10) many States have no laws addressing violence based on the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability, of the victim, while other States have laws that provide only limited protection. SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF HATE CRIME. In this Act, the term `hate crime' has the same meaning as in section 280003(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (28 U.S.C. 994 note). ( H.R.3355 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate SEC. 280003. DIRECTION TO UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION REGARDING SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS FOR HATE CRIMES. (a) DEFINITION- In this section, `hate crime' means a crime in which the defendant intentionally selects a victim, or in the case of a property crime , the property that is the object of the crime , because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person. ) SEC. 4. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN ACTS OF VIOLENCE. Section 245 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections (d) and (e), respectively; and (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: `(c)(1) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person-- `(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, or fined in accordance with this title, or both; and `(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or fined in accordance with this title, or both if-- `(i) death results from the acts committed in violation of this paragraph; or `(ii) the acts committed in violation of this paragraph include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill. `(2)(A) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability of any person-- `(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, or fined in accordance with this title, or both; and `(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or fined in accordance with this title, or both, if-- `(I) death results from the acts committed in violation of this paragraph; or `(II) the acts committed in violation of this paragraph include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill. `(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the circumstances described in this subparagraph are that-- `(i) in connection with the offense, the defendant or the victim travels in interstate or foreign commerce, uses a facility or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce, or engages in any activity affecting interstate or foreign commerce; or `(ii) the offense is in or affects interstate or foreign commerce.'. SEC. 5. DUTIES OF FEDERAL SENTENCING COMMISSION. (a) Amendment of Federal Sentencing Guidelines- Pursuant to its authority under section 994 of title 28, United States Code, the United States Sentencing Commission shall study the issue of adult recruitment of juveniles to commit hate crimes and shall, if appropriate, amend the Federal sentencing guidelines to provide sentencing enhancements (in addition to the sentencing enhancement provided for the use of a minor during the commission of an offense) for adult defendants who recruit juveniles to assist in the commission of hate crimes. (b) Consistency With Other Guidelines- In carrying out this section, the United States Sentencing Commission shall-- (1) ensure that there is reasonable consistency with other Federal sentencing guidelines; and (2) avoid duplicative punishments for substantially the same offense. SEC. 6. GRANT PROGRAM. (a) Authority To Make Grants- The Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention of the Department of Justice shall make grants, in accordance with such regulations as the Attorney General may prescribe, to State and local programs designed to combat hate crimes committed by juveniles. (b) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section. SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL TO ASSIST STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT. There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of the Treasury and the Department of Justice, including the Community Relations Service, for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and 2009 such sums as are necessary to increase the number of personnel to prevent and respond to alleged violations of section 245 of title 18, United States Code (as amended by this Act). "------------------------------------------------------------------ Cheers, Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net references : total 10448 -rw-rw-r-- 1 crashrec klant 1378371 Jun 29 2006 05-184.pdf -rw-r--r-- 1 crashrec klant 7193864 Jan 28 2007 20070124_Wed_Piper.mp3 -rw-rw-r-- 1 crashrec klant 42909 Dec 3 05:37 h254ih.txt.pdf -rw-rw-r-- 1 crashrec klant 1394134 Dec 3 05:34 h3355enr.txt.pdf -rw-rw-r-- 1 crashrec klant 241747 Jul 7 21:22 HR6304pcs.txt.pdf -rw-r--r-- 1 crashrec klant 254 Dec 3 05:46 MD5SUM First published on Sun, 2 Jul 2006