A BRIEF ENQUIRY INTO THE TRUE NATURE AND CHARACTER OF OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Starmail - 30. Aug, 23:40
Civil Rights - Buergerrechte
30
Aug
2004
29
Aug
2004
28
Aug
2004
The Power of the People
A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
http://www.ANSWERcoalition.org
The Power of the People
August 24, 2004
The political equation is changing very rapidly in New York City since Friday, August 20. The legal and political challenge has created a political crisis for the Bloomberg Administration. The lawsuit filed by the attorneys for the National Council of Arab Americans and the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition led to a dramatic emergency hearing on Friday, August 20. This legal challenge put front and center the unconstitutional nature of the government's ban on demonstration in the Great Lawn of Central Park. This received widespread media attention. In the packed courtroom and before the media, the City's arguments were shown to be demonstrably false and contradictory.
The administration badly miscalculated in the handling of this whole affair. They thought people would capitulate when the government attempted to ban mass protests from the Great Lawn in Central Park. Instead people are resisting. With each new attack from the city or the courts since Friday, the response is "we have a right to be in Central Park." Some in the administration, and in the NYPD, probably wish they could do it all over again. And perhaps they still will do it all over again.
The spontaneous reaction to the Judge's decision and the widely publicized response to the Judge ruling from the A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition spokesperson - that "Thousands of people are coming, and many of them intend to be in Central Park, and we believe that it is their right to be in Central Park" (from August 24 NY Times front page story) - has made it as clear as day to the authorities that the denial of permits for the August 28 and 29 demonstrations was a huge miscalculation. Even unnamed police officials are now being quoted in the media that the Mayor and the city made a mistake by denying the permits because the people are likely to assert their free speech rights and descend on Central Park. This is a sign that the powers that be are getting nervous.
The power of a determined people is always greater than the politicians. If earlier generations had allowed the powers-that-be to impose their desire to restrict free speech, and they always use some sanctimonious rationale to justify their restrictions, the now-threatened First Amendment would have vanished long ago.
The message of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition is simple: Progressive organizations and the communities that they represent must take a stand. The government has embarked on a war of aggression abroad and an assault on civil rights and civil liberties at home.
We have an absolute right and, indeed, an obligation to gather together in the largest possible numbers in New York City during the coming week.
Bring your friends, family and co-workers to the upcoming demonstrations.
Informant: lynnzy
http://www.ANSWERcoalition.org
The Power of the People
August 24, 2004
The political equation is changing very rapidly in New York City since Friday, August 20. The legal and political challenge has created a political crisis for the Bloomberg Administration. The lawsuit filed by the attorneys for the National Council of Arab Americans and the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition led to a dramatic emergency hearing on Friday, August 20. This legal challenge put front and center the unconstitutional nature of the government's ban on demonstration in the Great Lawn of Central Park. This received widespread media attention. In the packed courtroom and before the media, the City's arguments were shown to be demonstrably false and contradictory.
The administration badly miscalculated in the handling of this whole affair. They thought people would capitulate when the government attempted to ban mass protests from the Great Lawn in Central Park. Instead people are resisting. With each new attack from the city or the courts since Friday, the response is "we have a right to be in Central Park." Some in the administration, and in the NYPD, probably wish they could do it all over again. And perhaps they still will do it all over again.
The spontaneous reaction to the Judge's decision and the widely publicized response to the Judge ruling from the A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition spokesperson - that "Thousands of people are coming, and many of them intend to be in Central Park, and we believe that it is their right to be in Central Park" (from August 24 NY Times front page story) - has made it as clear as day to the authorities that the denial of permits for the August 28 and 29 demonstrations was a huge miscalculation. Even unnamed police officials are now being quoted in the media that the Mayor and the city made a mistake by denying the permits because the people are likely to assert their free speech rights and descend on Central Park. This is a sign that the powers that be are getting nervous.
The power of a determined people is always greater than the politicians. If earlier generations had allowed the powers-that-be to impose their desire to restrict free speech, and they always use some sanctimonious rationale to justify their restrictions, the now-threatened First Amendment would have vanished long ago.
The message of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition is simple: Progressive organizations and the communities that they represent must take a stand. The government has embarked on a war of aggression abroad and an assault on civil rights and civil liberties at home.
We have an absolute right and, indeed, an obligation to gather together in the largest possible numbers in New York City during the coming week.
Bring your friends, family and co-workers to the upcoming demonstrations.
Informant: lynnzy
Starmail - 28. Aug, 00:04
27
Aug
2004
McCain, 9/11 panel want national ID debate
The vice chairman of the Sept. 11 Commission told a Senate panel Monday that the commission's recommendations on border and transportation security "might lead to" a national identity card.
Although the commission shied away from directly making the controversial call in its final report, "We did recommend national standards for drivers' licenses," Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton told the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. "Over time," he told committee Chairman Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., "that might lead to a national ID card." "Isn't that a fundamental issue that we're going to have to address as a nation?" McCain asked Commission Chairman Tom Kean. The American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement Tuesday that federal standards for drivers' licenses constituted a "backdoor attempt to create a national ID-card system and a serious threat to privacy, liberty and safety."
They said the idea "would provide a new tool for racial, religious or ethnic profiling and would lead to far more illegal discrimination."
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040816-061940-3291r
Source:
Aftermath News
Top Stories - August 26th, 2004
Although the commission shied away from directly making the controversial call in its final report, "We did recommend national standards for drivers' licenses," Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton told the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. "Over time," he told committee Chairman Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., "that might lead to a national ID card." "Isn't that a fundamental issue that we're going to have to address as a nation?" McCain asked Commission Chairman Tom Kean. The American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement Tuesday that federal standards for drivers' licenses constituted a "backdoor attempt to create a national ID-card system and a serious threat to privacy, liberty and safety."
They said the idea "would provide a new tool for racial, religious or ethnic profiling and would lead to far more illegal discrimination."
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040816-061940-3291r
Source:
Aftermath News
Top Stories - August 26th, 2004
Starmail - 27. Aug, 18:36
Terror watch lists are tough to escape
If your name mistakenly is placed on a terrorism watch list by federal officials, setting the record straight is often difficult. Just ask Sen. Edward Kennedy. The nation's confusing array of terrorism watch lists -- such as those that snagged Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and Rep. John Lewis -- can be easy to get on, but far more difficult to get off.
It took Kennedy, one of the country's best-known senators, three weeks and several calls to federal officials to separate his identity from that of a person with a similar name on the no-fly list. Lesser-known Americans face greater hurdles when their name is flagged by an airline computer. TSA and the DHS do not disclose the names on the watch lists or any details about the lists. But a government official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that a number of watch lists are being consolidated, and it wasn't clear which agency put a name similar to Kennedy's on the list. The TSA reportedly has a few thousand names on a ''no fly'' list, which bans people from boarding plans, and another few thousand on a list that identifies people for additional screening, the official said.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/9463679.htm?1c
Source:
Aftermath News
Top Stories - August 26th, 2004
It took Kennedy, one of the country's best-known senators, three weeks and several calls to federal officials to separate his identity from that of a person with a similar name on the no-fly list. Lesser-known Americans face greater hurdles when their name is flagged by an airline computer. TSA and the DHS do not disclose the names on the watch lists or any details about the lists. But a government official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that a number of watch lists are being consolidated, and it wasn't clear which agency put a name similar to Kennedy's on the list. The TSA reportedly has a few thousand names on a ''no fly'' list, which bans people from boarding plans, and another few thousand on a list that identifies people for additional screening, the official said.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/9463679.htm?1c
Source:
Aftermath News
Top Stories - August 26th, 2004
Starmail - 27. Aug, 17:55
Wiser but weaker
by Kathy Fisher
Unknown News
08/24/04
Generations will become wiser, hip to who's pulling the strings of our so-called leaders, hip to who's telling the lies, who's ripping us off, who's poisoning us. We will and have come to understand who is putting us into danger, who is leading us into one war after another, who has written a twisted book full of NWO laws called the PATRIOT Act and PATRIOT Act II, all so they can have total control over us. We know why the cameras are really focussed on us, on Americans, and not on the fake phony terrorists our leaders have made up for us to be afraid of. Yes, we have become wiser alright, but here comes that weaker part I was warned about: We no longer have the power to rid ourselves of these parasites of tyranny...
http://www.unknownnews.net/040824a-kf.html
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
Unknown News
08/24/04
Generations will become wiser, hip to who's pulling the strings of our so-called leaders, hip to who's telling the lies, who's ripping us off, who's poisoning us. We will and have come to understand who is putting us into danger, who is leading us into one war after another, who has written a twisted book full of NWO laws called the PATRIOT Act and PATRIOT Act II, all so they can have total control over us. We know why the cameras are really focussed on us, on Americans, and not on the fake phony terrorists our leaders have made up for us to be afraid of. Yes, we have become wiser alright, but here comes that weaker part I was warned about: We no longer have the power to rid ourselves of these parasites of tyranny...
http://www.unknownnews.net/040824a-kf.html
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
Starmail - 27. Aug, 16:10
26
Aug
2004
Media Reform Needed for a Continuing Democracy
by Peter Phillips
The First Amendment of the US constitution, guaranteeing freedom of the press, was established to maximize citizen cognition of critical issues in society. It was understood clearly by the founders that Democracy could only be maintained through an informed electorate.
A daily newspaper, along with the three major TV networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, as well as CNN, MSNBC, and Fox, are the major sources of news and information for most Americans. News stories and the invidious entertainment segments from these corporate sources generally have similar themes and common frames of understanding. This concentration of access to media sources leaves most Americans with very narrow parameters of news awareness and an almost complete lack of competing opinions.
Important questions that impact most Americans are generally ignored. Why are 45 million American without health care? Why is poverty increasing in the US? What happened to the safety net of social programs for the disadvantaged? What are the underlying reasons - other than oil - for the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan? Will the military draft be re-instituted in the US after the 04 election? What is the truth behind global warming and extreme weather conditions? Where have all the living wage jobs gone? Why is minimum wage now at 60% of its value in 1968? Who got rich in the 90s and kept the money? Who owns the electronic voting machine companies?
Each of these questions and many more directly affect nearly every American and their personal motivations to participate in the democratic process. Yet the corporate media choose not to address these important issues in any significant way. Instead, they are keeping us on top of the Peterson murder case, the Michael Jackson trial and the threat of new terror attacks.
By not addressing relevant issues facing everyday Americans, the corporate media are weakening democracy in the US. More than half the eligible voters in the country do not vote in elections. Most non-voters believe their vote matters very little. Therefore, they do not make the effort to distinguish important issues between candidates nor do the corporate media do it for them. Non-voters often see little difference between the two primary political parties and tend to believe that voting is a waste of time.
The corporate media agenda of maximum profits undermines the public purpose of a free press by creating the fiscal necessity for cutting costs and increasing the entertainment content. Ratings and audience share translate to higher advertising value and higher profits. This structural arrangement of corporate media results in an electorate who perceive few personal reasons to get involved, not just as voters but as activists on political issues as well.
How can we address media reform to broaden citizen democratic participation? The regulator of the media -- the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) -- is the body established to insure that the purposes of the First Amendment are maintained. Bush administration pro-corporate media appointees, however, have captured the FCC. Chaired by Michael Powell, the FCC has been trying to relax the media ownership rules by allowing expanded market share by any single media conglomerate and they propose to deregulate the rules of cross ownership between radio, television and newspapers in the same locale.
Members of Congress have been attempting to scale back the proposed FCC changes, but they need a public outcry to encourage them to continue their efforts.
Media reform is not a topic covered by the corporate media themselves and without a strong public expression of concern congressional resolve may weaken in an election year. We must continue the pressure and demand that a diversity of independent news sources be maintained in every city. And we must ask for public funding of locally-controlled grassroots independent news agencies throughout the country as well. Democracy is too precious to lose.
Peter Phillips is Department Chair and Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and director of Project Censored, a media research organization.
Peter Phillips Ph.D.
Sociology Department/Project Censored
Sonoma State University
1801 East Cotati Ave.
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
707-664-2588
http://www.projectcensored.org/
The First Amendment of the US constitution, guaranteeing freedom of the press, was established to maximize citizen cognition of critical issues in society. It was understood clearly by the founders that Democracy could only be maintained through an informed electorate.
A daily newspaper, along with the three major TV networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, as well as CNN, MSNBC, and Fox, are the major sources of news and information for most Americans. News stories and the invidious entertainment segments from these corporate sources generally have similar themes and common frames of understanding. This concentration of access to media sources leaves most Americans with very narrow parameters of news awareness and an almost complete lack of competing opinions.
Important questions that impact most Americans are generally ignored. Why are 45 million American without health care? Why is poverty increasing in the US? What happened to the safety net of social programs for the disadvantaged? What are the underlying reasons - other than oil - for the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan? Will the military draft be re-instituted in the US after the 04 election? What is the truth behind global warming and extreme weather conditions? Where have all the living wage jobs gone? Why is minimum wage now at 60% of its value in 1968? Who got rich in the 90s and kept the money? Who owns the electronic voting machine companies?
Each of these questions and many more directly affect nearly every American and their personal motivations to participate in the democratic process. Yet the corporate media choose not to address these important issues in any significant way. Instead, they are keeping us on top of the Peterson murder case, the Michael Jackson trial and the threat of new terror attacks.
By not addressing relevant issues facing everyday Americans, the corporate media are weakening democracy in the US. More than half the eligible voters in the country do not vote in elections. Most non-voters believe their vote matters very little. Therefore, they do not make the effort to distinguish important issues between candidates nor do the corporate media do it for them. Non-voters often see little difference between the two primary political parties and tend to believe that voting is a waste of time.
The corporate media agenda of maximum profits undermines the public purpose of a free press by creating the fiscal necessity for cutting costs and increasing the entertainment content. Ratings and audience share translate to higher advertising value and higher profits. This structural arrangement of corporate media results in an electorate who perceive few personal reasons to get involved, not just as voters but as activists on political issues as well.
How can we address media reform to broaden citizen democratic participation? The regulator of the media -- the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) -- is the body established to insure that the purposes of the First Amendment are maintained. Bush administration pro-corporate media appointees, however, have captured the FCC. Chaired by Michael Powell, the FCC has been trying to relax the media ownership rules by allowing expanded market share by any single media conglomerate and they propose to deregulate the rules of cross ownership between radio, television and newspapers in the same locale.
Members of Congress have been attempting to scale back the proposed FCC changes, but they need a public outcry to encourage them to continue their efforts.
Media reform is not a topic covered by the corporate media themselves and without a strong public expression of concern congressional resolve may weaken in an election year. We must continue the pressure and demand that a diversity of independent news sources be maintained in every city. And we must ask for public funding of locally-controlled grassroots independent news agencies throughout the country as well. Democracy is too precious to lose.
Peter Phillips is Department Chair and Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and director of Project Censored, a media research organization.
Peter Phillips Ph.D.
Sociology Department/Project Censored
Sonoma State University
1801 East Cotati Ave.
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
707-664-2588
http://www.projectcensored.org/
Starmail - 26. Aug, 15:56
25
Aug
2004
Harassment on Fox TV
Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:42:10 -0500
Sueann Campbell is an anti gang stalking and electronic harassment activist from the Austin, Texas area:
There has been a big fight going on in Austin over free speech and the new plan proposed by the board of directors of the local public access TV channel (ACTV). Basically, the board of this first in the nation public access cable channel wants to first stop the free speech shows from airing, and finally shut it down altogether.
Patriot broadcaster Alex Jones is one of the free speech shows, who is partly responsible for this small station's having ratings higher than public television in Austin.
It started last month with several meetings with the city counsel, ACTV board, and producers. Producers and public fans filled the rooms each time. In addition, two counsel members are being recalled for their votes on toll roads. (a scandalous 8 roads that are already paid for by the taxpayer) The public feels that the purpose of these toll booths is to impede traffic flow and rob people of what little money they have left. (Austin lags behind Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio in job opportunity.)
Often I am involved in these activities, if nothing else, just to tape the meeting and turn over the tape to Alex Jones and other ACTV producers. This provides opportunity to wear the anti gang stalking Tee shirt and this often starts some kind of dialogue.
Today, I stopped by the gun show. Friends who have tables there appreciate a little help when packing up their tables. Naturally, I wore my gang stalking t-shirt. A lady stopped by the table and started asking questions. I gave her a flyer and we continued to talk.
"Yeah." she said. "They harass the victim in such a way that it makes the victim look crazy."
"How did you know?" I asked. "Are you being harassed?"
"No." she replied. "I saw it on TV."
"You're kidding!" I said. "What channel?"
"It was on the Fox channel." she said.
"Who would dare air this story?" I asked.
"Bill O'Rilley." she said.
"When did you see this on Bill O'Rilley?"
"Earlier this year." she said
"Did you tape the show?" I asked.
"No, but it was on just a couple of months ago."
Does anyone out there watch Bill O'Rilley? Did anyone tape this show?
The lady says our story is there! (Or at least part of it.)
Sueann
Informant: Romy
Sueann Campbell is an anti gang stalking and electronic harassment activist from the Austin, Texas area:
There has been a big fight going on in Austin over free speech and the new plan proposed by the board of directors of the local public access TV channel (ACTV). Basically, the board of this first in the nation public access cable channel wants to first stop the free speech shows from airing, and finally shut it down altogether.
Patriot broadcaster Alex Jones is one of the free speech shows, who is partly responsible for this small station's having ratings higher than public television in Austin.
It started last month with several meetings with the city counsel, ACTV board, and producers. Producers and public fans filled the rooms each time. In addition, two counsel members are being recalled for their votes on toll roads. (a scandalous 8 roads that are already paid for by the taxpayer) The public feels that the purpose of these toll booths is to impede traffic flow and rob people of what little money they have left. (Austin lags behind Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio in job opportunity.)
Often I am involved in these activities, if nothing else, just to tape the meeting and turn over the tape to Alex Jones and other ACTV producers. This provides opportunity to wear the anti gang stalking Tee shirt and this often starts some kind of dialogue.
Today, I stopped by the gun show. Friends who have tables there appreciate a little help when packing up their tables. Naturally, I wore my gang stalking t-shirt. A lady stopped by the table and started asking questions. I gave her a flyer and we continued to talk.
"Yeah." she said. "They harass the victim in such a way that it makes the victim look crazy."
"How did you know?" I asked. "Are you being harassed?"
"No." she replied. "I saw it on TV."
"You're kidding!" I said. "What channel?"
"It was on the Fox channel." she said.
"Who would dare air this story?" I asked.
"Bill O'Rilley." she said.
"When did you see this on Bill O'Rilley?"
"Earlier this year." she said
"Did you tape the show?" I asked.
"No, but it was on just a couple of months ago."
Does anyone out there watch Bill O'Rilley? Did anyone tape this show?
The lady says our story is there! (Or at least part of it.)
Sueann
Informant: Romy
Starmail - 25. Aug, 23:44
Datenschutzgarantien für biometrische Merkmale in Pässen gefordert
Datenschutz: Datenschutzgarantien für biometrische Merkmale in Pässen gefordert
25.08.04
Der Bundesbeauftragte für den Datenschutz und Vorsitzende der EU Datenschutzbeauftragten, Peter Schaar, hat bei der Einführung biometrischer Merkmale in Reisepässen Garantien für den Datenschutz gefordert. Aktueller Anlass ist ein entsprechender Entwurf des Europäischen Rats, der noch vor dem Herbst beraten und verabschiedet werden soll. Die biometrischen Merkmale sollen danach vor allem der besseren Identifizierung der Passinhaber dienen und Passfälschungen verhindern. Schaar fordert eine strikte Begrenzung auf diese Zwecke und erklärt: "Die Daten dürfen ausschließlich in den Dokumenten selbst und nicht in einer zentralen Passdatei gespeichert werden."
Die ganze Nachricht im Internet:
http://www.ngo-online.de/ganze_nachricht.php4?Nr=9167
25.08.04
Der Bundesbeauftragte für den Datenschutz und Vorsitzende der EU Datenschutzbeauftragten, Peter Schaar, hat bei der Einführung biometrischer Merkmale in Reisepässen Garantien für den Datenschutz gefordert. Aktueller Anlass ist ein entsprechender Entwurf des Europäischen Rats, der noch vor dem Herbst beraten und verabschiedet werden soll. Die biometrischen Merkmale sollen danach vor allem der besseren Identifizierung der Passinhaber dienen und Passfälschungen verhindern. Schaar fordert eine strikte Begrenzung auf diese Zwecke und erklärt: "Die Daten dürfen ausschließlich in den Dokumenten selbst und nicht in einer zentralen Passdatei gespeichert werden."
Die ganze Nachricht im Internet:
http://www.ngo-online.de/ganze_nachricht.php4?Nr=9167
Starmail - 25. Aug, 19:15
Quit Spying on Nonviolent Activists
Anti-Terrorism Tip: Quit Spying on Nonviolent Activists
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0823-15.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0823-15.htm
Starmail - 25. Aug, 15:00
