Sunday, December 30, 2007

RFID Chips in Drivers' Licenses

(Radio Frequency IDentification)

An easy, unaccountable means for tracking dissidents ...

Arizona, Michigan, Vermont and Washington to be 1st States within the U.S. to betray automobile traveler privacy by installing RFID tracking chips in peoples' drivers licenses, readable within 30 feet via roadside readers. This is being done on a volunteer basis for now. More ...

Think about all of the post 2001 upgrading to interstate highway truck weighing stations.

According to this site, RFID chips were invented in 1969, and patented in 1972. They are dynamic, that is they transmit and receive, but avoiding the need for batteries by essentially listening for a certain frequency that instructs it to transmit an ID code. As of now, their price has dropped to 50 cent apiece. They are being installed in a greater number of consumer goods, including Michelin tires, and may soon be included in Euro money notes.

What will be next, mandatory RFID chips in IDs, license plates and ...?

This company promotes RFID chips in license plates.

The U.S. REAL ID Act mandates that the various States within the U.S. adopt standards for IDs including connecting data bases, and granting the U.S. Department of Homeland Security "unfetted authority to design state ID cards and driver's licenses. Among the possibilities: biometric information such as retinal scans, fingerprints, DNA data and RFID tracking."

Countdown to REAL ID (May 11, 2008)

They can also be installed in people, as shown in this video.

RFID books

Saturday, December 29, 2007

Senator Kennedy: The President's self-serving attempt to avoid legal and political accountability

From Electronic Freedom Foundation:

[From], Senator Ted Kennedy (MA), who introduced the original FISA intelligence oversight legislation 30 years ago:

Think about what we’ve been hearing from the White House in this debate. The President has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA. But he has also said that he will veto any FISA bill that does not grant retroactive immunity. No immunity, no new FISA bill. So if we take the President at his word, he is willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies. The President’s insistence on immunity as a precondition for any FISA reform is yet another example of his disrespect for honest dialogue and for the rule of law.

It’s painfully clear what the President’s request for retroactive immunity is really about. It’s a self-serving attempt to avoid legal and political accountability and keep the American public in the dark about this whole shameful episode. Like the CIA’s destruction of videotapes showing potentially criminal conduct, it’s a desperate attempt to erase the past.

Along with the criminal apostate U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Drug Enforcement Agency, and Commonwealth of Virginia with the police video being "just grey static" during the testilied supported criminal law enforcement search and seizure of August 5, 2006- violating the 4th amendment in order to violate the 1st amendment.
The aborted, un-reported South Capital Mall

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Mukasey Signals He'll Be a Strong Bush Assett

The New York Times published an article on December 20, 2007 titled "Mukasey Signals He'll Be a Strong Bush Advocate"


In what was billed as a major policy speech on Wednesday to a panel of the American Bar Association, Mr. Mukasey suggested that lawmakers who opposed legislation before Congress to broaden eavesdropping powers — and to offer legal protection for telephone utilities that cooperate — were undermining the ability to deal with terrorist threats.

“We’ve seen what happens when terrorists go undetected,” he said. “We have to do everything possible within the law to prevent terrorists from translating their warped beliefs into action. To stop them, we have to know their intentions, and one of the best ways to do that is by intercepting their communications.”

He used the speech to step up the call for telephone utilities to have legal immunity for their past cooperation with the eavesdropping without warrants by the National Security Agency.

In recent days, Mr. Mukasey has also upset Congressional Democrats by saying he would refuse to share information about the Justice Department’s investigation of the Central Intelligence Agency’s destruction of tapes of the interrogation of top figures of Al Qaeda.

Mr. Mukasey wrote in a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week that he was only following tradition in declining to reveal “nonpublic” information to Congress about a potential criminal investigation. ...

The White House and Mr. Mukasey are pressing Congress to approve bills to make permanent a broad expansion of the National Security Agency’s wiretapping and eavesdropping and provide legal protection to phone utilities.

On Monday, Senate Democrats announced that they would put off any vote on the measures until next year, a setback for the administration.

Mr. Mukasey said it was crucial that the utilities have immunity from suits that accuse them of violating customers’ privacy rights and that ask them for billions of dollars in penalities.

“We simply cannot afford to discourage the private sector from helping us to detect and prevent the next terrorist attack,” he said. “Such companies deserve our gratitude, not litigation.”

Legalizing torture is a prime example of this nation going apostate no matter how the term is defined -- loosing its values and/or following the dictates of the entity that's history's biggest user of torture, the Roman Catholic Church.

Having been targeted by criminal law enforcement search and seizure with the police video "just grey static", I see Mukasey as a likely rubber stamp for a criminal apostate shadow government that criminally violates its 4th Amendment with the goal of violating its 1st Amendment.

Monday, December 24, 2007

Hoover Planned a "Master Warrant"

FBI Chief Hoover Planned to jail 12,000 and suspend habeas corpus


In the summer of 1950, 12 days after the outbreak of the Korean war, FBI director J Edgar Hoover presented a plan to arrest 12,000 people and detain them permanently in military facilities and prisons. The names would come from a list compiled over years by Hoover, who was director of the bureau from 1924 to 1972.

The arrests, Hoover wrote in a plan presented to President Harry Truman, would be made under "a master warrant attached to a list of names".

The index of names "now contains approximately 12,000 individuals, of which approximately 97% are citizens of the United States," he wrote.

"In order to make effective these apprehensions, the proclamation suspends the writ of habeas corpus."

Monday, December 17, 2007

Peru's ex - President Fujimori Sentenced to 6 Years for criminal search

So when shall this happen with Bush?

LIMA - Former president Alberto Fujimori was convicted and sentenced to six years in prison yesterday on a charge of abuse of authority stemming from an illegal search he ordered as his government imploded in scandal seven years ago. Supreme Court Judge Pedro Guillermo Urbina declared that Fujimori was guilty of abusing his power ... more

Criminal Apostate NSA Public Health Subversion

From The New York Times
Wider Spying Fuels Aid Plan for Telcon Industry:

In the drug-trafficking operation, the N.S.A. has been helping the Drug Enforcement Administration in collecting the phone records showing patterns of calls between the United States, Latin America and other drug-producing regions. The program dates to the 1990s, according to several government officials, but it appears to have expanded in recent years.
With the drug war subverting public health with the market protection of more dangerous substances from safer ones, and the perversion of safer substances into infinitely more dangerous substances, NSA cooperation with the DEA is another form of treason.

The Drug War is Un-Constitutional

Saturday, December 15, 2007

G.W. Bush - NSA Criminal Spying on the Public

From Citizens for Legitimate Government
'Within two weeks of taking office, the Bush administration was planning a comprehensive effort of spying on Americans' phone usage.' Wider Spying Fuels Aid Plan for Telecom Industry 16 Dec 2007 For months, the Bush regime has waged a high-profile campaign, including personal lobbying by President [sic] Bush and closed-door briefings by top officials, to persuade Congress to pass legislation protecting companies from lawsuits for aiding the National Security Agency’s warrantless eavesdropping program... In December 2000, N.S.A. officials wrote a transition report to the incoming Bush administration, saying the agency must become a "powerful, permanent presence" on the commercial communications network, a goal that they acknowledged would raise legal and privacy issues... A lawsuit filed in federal court in New Jersey claims that in February 2001, the N.S.A. met with AT&T officials to discuss replicating a network center in Bedminster, N.J., to give the agency access to all the global phone and e-mail traffic that ran through it. [Since Bush bin Laden has been spying since December 2000, why wasn't he able to prevent the 9/11 terrorist attacks?]

Can a FISA Court Be Trusted?

How they play ball...

Another editorial from The New York Times relevant to the U.S. Government's criminal abuse of surveillance to subvert the 1st Amendment.

The Court That May Not Be Heard


Last week, the court denied a request by the American Civil Liberties Union to release portions of past rulings that would explain how it has interpreted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. There are legitimate national security concerns at stake, but the court should share its legal reasoning with the public.

After the 9/11 attacks, the National Security Agency for years engaged in domestic spying that violated both FISA and the Constitution. Earlier this year, after a court ruled that the program was illegal, the Bush administration said that in the future it would conduct surveillance with the approval of the intelligence court. At the same time, it announced that a judge of the court had issued orders setting out how the program could proceed.

The administration has repeatedly referred to these orders, but has refused to make them public. As a result, it is impossible for the American people — and even some members of Congress — to know how the court reached its conclusions, or the state of the law with respect to domestic surveillance.

FISA Judges are appointed by the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, currently the man in the middle here, John Roberts.

From Wikipedia Chief Justice of the United States:
Appoints the members of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (or FISC), a "secret court" which oversees requests for surveillance warrants by federal police agencies (primarily the F.B.I.) against suspected foreign intelligence agents inside the United States. (see 50 U.S.C. § 1803).

U.S. President Bush and Chief Justice Roberts with Cardinal Archbiship McCarrick

Mukasey's Mirror of Logic

From The New York Times:
AG Rejects Demand for Information
Published: December 14, 2007

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey has firmly rejected Congressional demands that he provide information about the Justice Department’s investigation into the Central Intelligence Agency’s destruction of videotapes showing interrogations, a stance that inflamed a feud between Capitol Hill and the administration this afternoon.

“The department has a long-standing policy of declining to provide nonpublic information about pending matters,” Mr. Mukasey wrote, in letters to Senate and House committee leaders, in which he noted that the Justice Department’s National Security Division and the C.I.A.’s inspector general’s office have already opened an inquiry into the episode.

Taking a position that annoyed a prominent Republican as well as Democrats, the attorney general wrote, “This policy is based in part on our interest in avoiding any perception that our law enforcement decisions are subject to political influence.”
Allowing the Bush Administration another cover up absolutely sends a message that the U.S. Attorney General is subject to political influence.

Welcome to Pottersville: We Can Have Our Cake and Eat it, Too.

Friday, December 14, 2007

Criminal Apostate NSA deleting posts at Fascist Empire Planet?

The aborted, unreported U.S. National Capital Planning Commission
Washington, D.C. South Capitol Mall
(from "Extending the Legacy: Planning America's Capital for the 21st Century")

Many thanks to the person or persons behind Fascist Empire Planet for recently adding my "South Capitol Street" and "Freedom of Medicine and Diet" blogs.

However, while I was pleased to see recent posts from both, along with "Free Speech Beneath USHS" and "Continuing Counter Reformation" at Fascist Empire Planet, I see today that the South Capitol Street posts DO NOT APPEAR.

My guess is that the criminal apostate US NSA has the power to delete posts in complete violation of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; and that they have a problem with people knowing what's obvious when one who knows about the aborted USNCPC South Capitol Mall, walks along South Capitol Street and sees that the only surviving building is the St.Vincent de Paul Roman Catholic Church.

St. Vincent de Paul Church-
the sole building along South Capitol Street saved by the South Capitol Mall's cancellation

Any TRUE Protestant and anyone else interested in the truth should thus be very very interested in how they got away with this, and why should they have objected to even moving that church, with a total media blackout, when the RCC demolishes old churches elsewhere, such as the St. Bridget's Church in NY.

Likewise with anyone interested in the planning of Washington, D.C. and its L'Enfant Plan.

A government that deletes posts is CRIMINAL UNDER THE HIGHEST LAW IN THE U.S.


Minutes later, the South Capitol Street blog posts have re-appeared at Fascist Empire Planet, even as they curiously remain omitted in its title list which appears above the actual articles.

Thursday, December 13, 2007

APSU mock trial rules President Bush “guilty” of illegal domestic surveillance

Verdicts are in on the two day mock trial, U.S. vs. Bush. Bush was found guilty on the charges relating to illegal and unauthorized domestic surveillance and wiretapping of American citizens and violating the Separation of Powers and FISA by ordering a secret Executive Order authorizing such action.



Standing from left: Lead Defense, Jessica Lance, Frankie A. DeJesus and Matt Harris, APSU Professor Dr. Rabidoux,; Lead Prosecutors Michael Hughey, Mike Price and Liz Borsavage. The Judges, seated from left, Kasey Henricks, Emery Walters, Enderson Miranda, Ryan Knight and Zach Suggs

Sunday, November 25, 2007

TelCon Cell Phone GPS Tracking Routine

From The Washington Post, November 23, 2007
Secret Warrants Granted Without Probable Cause
"Most people don't realize it, but they're carrying a tracking device in their pocket," said Kevin Bankston of the privacy advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Cellphones can reveal very precise information about your location, and yet legal protections are very much up in the air."

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Something to Hide

President Bush, right, greets new Attorney General Michael Mukasey, center, at the conclusion of a ceremonial swearing-in, Wednesday, Nov. 14, 2007,at the Justice Department in Washington. Chief Justice John Roberts is at center. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

From an op ed piece in The New York Times by Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, U.S. attorney general from 1965 to 1966, and Frederick A. O. Schwarz Jr. senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.


When the Justice Department, usually acting through its Office of Legal Counsel, issues legal opinions binding on the executive branch, there is never justification for keeping them secret. Opinions that narrowly define what constitutes torture; or open the door to sending prisoners for questioning to Egypt and Syria, which regularly use torture; or rule the president has some “inherent power” to ignore laws are all of concern to Congress and the public whether one agrees or disagrees with the legal analysis.

Yet all these opinions have been kept secret, along with many other, related post-9/11 opinions that purport to decide what America’s law is.

Secrecy always increases the risk of foolish mistakes. If the withheld opinions are sound, why fear letting them see the light of day? Is there ever a justification in a government of law for keeping what one believes to be the law secret?

Some may say releasing the opinions will lead to more embarrassment. To this, there are two answers. First, what is most important is that we get it right and remain true to our country’s values. Second, the best way to restore our reputation is to confront our mistakes openly and then resolve not to repeat them.

Foolish mistakes as subverting the values of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by targeting internet writers via criminal warrantless surveillance and law enforcement- particularly upon a time line suggesting the culprits as President George W. Bush and his masters at the Vatican.

U.S. National Capital Planning Commission's aborted South Capitol Mall

Washington Cardinal Archbishop Theodore Mc Carrick (2000-2006)

St. Vincent de Paul Church- the sole building along South Capitol Street saved by the South Capitol Mall's cancellation

Mark Tuohey of the DC Sports and Entertainment Commission, who sat on the Board of Trustees of Catholic University with McCarrick, and upon that of Gonzaga HS and Washington Jesuit Academy

The 2002 stadium study indicating St Vincent de Paul Church as the sole surviving building on the east side of this stretch of South Capitol StreetMajor League Baseball: the entity that insisted upon cramming this stadium along South Capitol Street, by making the specific location a condition of allowing the establishment of the Washington Nationals franchise

2008 is the last year he can throw the 1st ball as U.S. President
More on this custom of the U.S. President throwing the 1st ball:

"W" Stadium

Blogger Douglas A. Willinger Ambushed, Arrested (while carrying his Verizon cell phone)

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Whatever Happened to Extrigent Circumstances?

An exigent circumstance, in the American law of criminal procedure, allows law enforcement to enter a structure without a warrant, or if they have a "knock and announce" warrant, without knocking and waiting for refusal under certain circumstances. It must be a situation where people are in imminent danger, evidence faces imminent destruction or a suspect will escape.

Generally, an emergency, a pressing necessity, or a set of circumstances requiring immediate attention or swift action. In the criminal procedure context, exigent circumstances means:

An emergency situation requiring swift action to prevent imminent danger to life or serious damage to property, or to forestall the imminent escape of a suspect, or destruction of evidence. There is no ready litmus test for determining whether such circumstances exist, and in each case the extraordinary situation must be measured by the facts known by officials.
If it’s truly an emergency situation – the type cited to justify warrant less surveillance - then what’s the need for legalizing such broadly? Any such true emergency can always be justified openly: a thought that the Bush Administration would not agree. From the book The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration by Jack Goldsmith, former Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel:

“The President can also ignore the law, and act extralegally,” I said.

Gonzales and Addington looked at me as if I was crazy. I was not urging the President to break the law, I emphasized. I was simply letting his legal advisors that there were honorable precedents, going back to the founding of the nation, of defying legal restrictions in time of crisis. “A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the highest virtues of a good citizen, but it is not the highest” Thomas Jefferson wrote to a friend in 1810. “The laws of necessity, of self preservation, when in danger, are of higher obligation. To loose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written laws, would be to loose the law itself, with life liberty property and all of those who are enjoying then with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means.”

Jefferson was writing in a tradition of prerogative power that went back to the influential English philosopher John Locke, who believed that a leader’s first duty was to protect the country, not follow the law. But there was an important caveat to the prerogative, which I conveyed to Gonzales and Addington. In order to prevent abuse, the leader who disregards the laws should do so publicly, throwing himself on the mercy of congress and the people so that they could decide whether the emergency was severe enough to warrant extralegal action. “The line between cases may be difficult” Jefferson noted, “but the good officer is bound to draw it at his own peril, and throw himself on the justice of his country and the rectitude of his motives.” Public avowal of extralegal actions, and after-the-fact political scrutiny, limited and legitimized the legitimized the dangerous presidential prerogative.

Gonzales, Addington, and their respective clients were not remotely interested in this view. They believed their actions lawful, and even if they didn’t, they could not confess error publicly, as the logical of the prerogative power required, because doing so would tip off the enemy about our counterterrorist efforts…

And with “terrorists” comprising what, 0.0001% of the population what’s the need for the capacity of a 250,000 employee US Department of Homeland Security- one monitor per 1,200 people of the general population?

Monday, November 05, 2007

The Wobble Effect- of Politics:

What’s Really Driving this Surrendering Liberty to Fear

The Wobble Effect refers to how astronomers search for the planets they can't see directly, by observing the “wobble” upon the stars they orbit . By observing the seen – the star – they can "see" the unseen – the planets – by observing the latter’s effect upon the former. As such wobble is caused by gravity, and gravity is caused by rotating mass, a star's "wobble" indicates the presence of such planets.

This is definitely applicable to how our political system is run.

It is most obvious when politicians alter their stances to be synchronized with the wishes of the most powerful though not necessarily visible

I must wonder about looking at news as:

- A U.S. Congress of supposed pro civil liberties Democrats and pro small government Republicans, that voted in the PATRIOT Act, granting the federal government massive surveillance powers over the general public in all ways electronic including financial records, without oversight, within weeks of 911 with little or no debate.

- Such Democrats who shall vote in favor of a USAG that runs around questions about torture, namely Chuck Schumar and Diane Feinstein.

- Such Republicans who vote in favor of a USAG that runs around questions about torture, whether those sanctioning torture, such as Guiliani, Thompson and ROMnEy, or those claiming to oppose torture, such as McCain.

- Democrats and Republicans ignoring even a majority of people favoring some degree of Marijuana legalization, and voting to continue the 'drug war'

Senator Fein$tein Massive Conflict of Interest

Senator Feinstein's husband made $50 million in "defense" contracts over a 4 year period.

So much for the DemocRATs for safeguarding the U.S. Constitution.

Saturday, November 03, 2007

Schumar - Feinstein Give Pass to Mukasey

Key DemocRATs, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., cross party lines to pledge support for Bush Attorney General nominee [waterboard-waffling Michael Mukasey], clearing way for confirmation: Mukasey Edges Closer to Attorney General Confirmation 02 Nov 2007 ABC News' Ed O'Keefe: Two key Democrats crossed party lines and pledged their support to President [sic] Bush's embattled Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey, all but ensuring the retired judge's confirmation as the nation's top law enforcement official.

John Holmes wrote: 5h 32m ago

Very disappointed with Senator Schumer! The waterboarding issue is at the very heart of what Mr. Mukasey will do when he gets into power. Yes, he is not Alberto Gonzalez, at least for now. And that makes it even more pressing an issue for the DEMS to identify who Mr. Mukasey really is, and where his allegaince lies--to the country or to the President? A single question could take care of that. Now. Mr. Schumer and Ms. Feinstein have denied the whole country the ability to determine where Mr. Mukasey's allegiance lies.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Pope Benedict's Impending April 2008 Mass at Nationals Stadium

The Saga Continues:
the Vatican and Washington Nationals Stadium

One year to the day after I posted this about the Nationals Stadium -- G.W. Bush -- Vatican power play, the very same blog Wispers in the Loggia (which published the letter calling for the resignation of Cardinal Egan that I reported here), published the following about Pope Benedict's April 2008 visit to the U.S.
As currently planned, the trip's first full day will see the pontiff's 81st birthday. As reported in mid-September, the plans continue to point toward the visit's start in Washington. While most of the previously-noted itinerary of the Catholic University of America and diplomatic courtesies at the White House appear to remain in place, one reported change has the venue for Benedict's DC Mass pegged not for the expanse of the National Mall, but -- as with New York -- the new stadium of the Washington Nationals, currently projected to open barely a week before the visit takes place. (On a related note, Major League Baseball's scheduling for 2008 is still in its tentative stages and has not been publicly released.) Built to house a game capacity of 41,000, Nationals Park would likely seat closer to 50,000 for a papal liturgy.
This marks a change from what was reported previously by the Catholic News Agency:
Washington DC, Sep 17, 2007 / 10:15 am (CNA).- Details about Pope Benedict XVI’s much-anticipated apostolic journey to the United States next year have begun to emerge. Anticipated stops for the Pope’s first-ever US visit include, New York, Washington, Boston and possibly Baltimore.

The tentatively scheduled April 15 to 20 trip is centered around a papal speech before the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon personally invited the pontiff to address the UN.

However, plans for the voyage remain unconfirmed. George Weigel, in comments to CNA, said that "[i]f the Pope comes to the UN next spring, he'll obviously do one or two other American cities.” “Nevertheless, there is no decision I'm aware of on which it would be.”

Sources familiar with the plans for the papal visit say that the pontiff will visit New York, where he will celebrate Mass at Central Park, give an address in St. Patrick's Cathedral, and pause for a moment of reflection at Ground Zero.

The trip, however, will reportedly begin in Washington, where the Pope is expected to meet with the president, visit Catholic University of America and say Mass on the National Mall.

He will be holding Mass literally in the baseball stadium ON the Mall- that is the aborted South Capitol Mall.

This stadium -- now under construction and bearing essentially the name of that stadium in Santiago Chile made infamous by the Pinochet dictatorship -- Nationals Stadium, was politically rammed through with its knife edged clubhouse of the 'King of the World' -- the words of Jacqueline Dupree -- that essentially extends southward the building line of the sole building along South Capitol Street saved by the South Capitol Mall's abortion: St Vincent de Paul Roman Catholic Church

The South Capitol Extending the Legacy plan would have been the 1st major extension of monumental Washington D.C. since the western extension of the National Mall with the Reflecting Pool and the Lincoln Memorial.

The complete blackout by the mainstream media and the "environmentalist" and land planning related organizations of this conflict, with the public receiving no explanation for the Vatican's opposition to even relocating the St. Vincent de Paul Church, and with Cardinal Egan's closing and planned demolition of church structures in New York in the face of passionate parishioner opposition, such as with St. Brigid Church that faces Tomkins Square Park, serves as a monumental if not mysterious display of the Vatican's social and political power in the U.S.

South Capitol was to have a monumental promenade

But instead we'll get yet another K Street.

Mark Touhey, then Chairman of the D.C. Sports and Entertainment Commission involved with this miserably located stadium and a member of the Board of Trustees of Washington Jesuit Academy, Gonzaga HS and Catholic University of America