Total Pageviews

Saturday, April 22, 2017

Do Not Resist (2016)

Published on Oct 11, 2016 

"WINNER of the Grand Jury Prize for BEST DOCUMENTARY at the Tribeca Film Festival. An urgent and powerful exploration of the rapid militarization of the police in the United States. DO NOT RESIST– the directorial debut of Detropia cinematographer Craig Atkinson – offers a stunning look at the current state of policing in America and a glimpse into the future. 

The film takes viewers from a ride-along with a South Carolina SWAT team and inside a police training seminar that teaches the importance of “righteous violence” to the floor of a congressional hearing on the proliferation of military equipment in small-town police departments – before exploring where controversial new technologies, including predictive policing algorithms, could lead the field next."

Liberty at the movies: Do Not Resist

Quote" Anyone who doubts that America is well on its way to becoming a police state should watch Do Not Resist, a new documentary available for free download at Amazon.com. Do Not Resist examines the militarization of police. Like the best documentaries, Do Not Resist makes its points by showing, not telling. There is no narrator telling you how what you witnessed makes the case for policy change. The only time the filmmakers intrude is a few factual statements imposed on the screen.
The move examines various aspects of police militarization. One of the things I found startling was the clips of a speech at a police conference where the speaker justified police militarization by claiming that police were on the front lines of the war on terror. This scene was preceded by footage from the Ferguson, Missouri riots that resembled confrontation between U.S. military and civilian populations in Iraq rather than domestic law enforcement.
The speech is followed by clips of a New Hampshire town hall meeting where citizens in a town that has had two murders since 2004 debate accepting a $250,00 grant from Homeland Security to buy military equipment. The opponents of the grant argue getting police equipment built for military operations threaten liberty, not just by increasing the potential for police abuses, but by increasing federal spending on the military-industrial complex.
The way police militarization provides a new "market" for the military-industrial complex is not developed in the movie, but it does spend a fair amount of time on the ridiculousness of small towns arming themselves with military equipment.
The film also provides a look into how militarization affects the mindset of law enforcement. For instance, one police officer discusses how the military equipment is needed to control "unruly" crowds -- note he does not say violent, just unruly. Another LAPD officer says one of the benefits of the thousands of cameras enable them to know when a protest is occurring. Another police office says citizens sacrifice their right to privacy when they go out in public. Citizens just need to hope that the person looking up their information is doing so for the right reasons.
The movie shows an individual whose house was destroyed because the police mistakenly believed a drug dealer was living there. The man is told that he will not receive any compensation from the government for their mistakes. Adding insult to injury, the police confiscated cash the suspected dealer was planning to use to buy a lawnmower.
The film ends with a focus on what is to come. The filmmakers interview the founder and CEO of a company developing surveillance technology that can allow police to identify and track anyone within a certain radius of a crime scene. The CEO states use of his technology cannot just help solve major crimes, but can prevent lower-level crimes -- he never addresses the cost to liberty, or the potential for abuse of his product. He goes on to say he only wants to watch the parts of the world where crimes occur. But couldn't that be anywhere, so doesn't he need to watch everywhere?
The filmmakers also interview a professor who is developing a system to identify people likely to commit crimes. The professor claims his system can even tell if an unborn child is likely to commit a crime by looking at the parents' backgrounds! The professor expresses no concern for the civil liberties implications of his system.
Do Not Resist shows why ending police militarization, and the laws that justify it, should be a focus of the liberty movement. This is why Campaign for Liberty is working to repeal federal laws that support police militarization, as well as working to end civil asset theft.
The film also shows how laws criminalizing peaceful behaviors lead to authoritarianism. This is why Campaign for Liberty supports ending all unconstitutional laws that criminalizing peaceful behavior. We are also working to stop expanding the federal police state by criminalizing online gambling.
It is particularity important we keep reminding our representatives, such as House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, that supporting federal laws criminalizing online gamingdrinking raw milk, or other peaceful activities are inconsistent with their pledge to support limited federal government and federalism." End quote

Sunday, April 16, 2017

S.642 FAIR Act

Rand Paul | 14 April 2017

Bill Text: 
S.642 Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act of 2017” or the “FAIR Act”

Friend --

What would you say if someone walked up to your car, demanded the money you were carrying, and then walked away with it?

You'd call the police, right? What if it wasn't your neighbor, but rather law enforcement that did this to you? Local police, Federal officers, even the IRS and other federal agencies are using this abusive power.

Unfortunately, it happens too often, all across America. It is known as a Civil Asset Forfeiture, and you can have your money, car, home and more taken from you -- all without ever being convicted of a crime.

It is something you and I need to stop -- and now.

I'm doing something about it. I've introduced the FAIR Act (Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act), and I need to spread this message of liberty across the country.

And through the halls of Congress. Will you help today?

The FAIR Act:
  • Restores the integrity of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
  • Shifts the burden of proof from the property owner onto the government, restoring the principle of “innocent until proven guilty."
  • Raises the standard of proof in civil forfeiture proceedings from “preponderance of the evidence” (i.e. more likely than not) to “clear and convincing”
  • Eliminates the forfeiture financial incentive altogether. Federal agencies would no longer be able to seize their way to higher budgets.
  • Allows individuals and small business owners to request a prompt hearing to contest the seizure of their funds for alleged structuring violations.

During the 1980's, as the war on drugs was heating up, Congress passed laws that made it easier for the federal government to seize cars, cash -- even real estate.  Worst of all, Congress also created powerful financial incentives for it to happen.  Once property is seized, it can be auctioned off, and the agency can keep 100 percent of the money.

This is outrageous. And I want it to stop.

This doesn't just capture people who committed a crime. In fact, most civil asset forfeiture cases NEVER get a conviction.

And it doesn't apply to rich people.  This is a tax on the poor and middle class.  If the local police seize $500, and it will cost you $1,000 in lawyers to get it back, who is going to do it?

If you run a small home business and the IRS seizes $50,000 of your cash from your bank account, as happened recently, how are you going to afford to get it back?

You can't, and they know it.

That's why you and I have to stop them from taking it in the first place.

Will you help me spread the work to Congress and to mobilize more Americans for my FAIR act today?

Add Your Name

Allowing local and federal governments to have this power over our lives has massive consequences.

Russ Caswell knows this all too well.  Russ owned a hotel in Massachusetts, run by his family since 1955.  Although Russ was never charged with a crime, he had to wage a five year battle against the DEA because the government claimed drug activity at his hotel.  The evidence? 15 times out of 196,000 room rentals, someone had done something wrong there, without Russ knowing it.

That's less than 1/100 of 1 percent. But they wanted 100 percent of Russ's hotel.

Thankfully, lawyers from my friends at the Institute for Justice took his case pro bono, and years later, he won.

Most aren't so lucky.  Nearly 60,000 Americans had their property seized in his last ten years -- without even a charge filed.  In 81 percent of cases, no conviction occurs.

This is wrong.  And this is why we must push together for my FAIR Act, today

Tell Congress to Pass the FAIR Act

My FAIR Act protects YOU.  It provides an attorney by law. And it forces the burden of proof back to the Government, where it belongs.  You shouldn't have to prove why you can keep your own stuff. That's not America.

This is one of the great injustices of our time.  I hope you can see why this is worth fighting, and I hope you'll join with me today to push for change.

Add Your Name

And while you're there, please help RANDPAC keep spreading the message with a contribution today.

Thank you

Rand Paul MD

By: Tenth Amendment Center | 23 Mar 2017 

Nullify Chapter 22: Close the Federal Asset Forfeiture Loophole 

A federal program is undermining some of the toughest restrictions on asset forfeiture, but states can easily put an end to it.

Friday, April 14, 2017

Trump: Just Another Neocon Warmonger

Chuck Baldwin Live

By: Chuck Baldwin | 13 April 2017

“Talk is cheap” is a phrase that politicians teach us constantly. This time the teacher is Donald Trump. Donald Trump campaigned as an outsider, someone that was not owned by the establishment, and someone who would fight the globalists and drain “the swamp.” But “talk is cheap.”
In 2013, AFTER Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was accused of using sarin gas against his own countrymen, Trump tweeted, “What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.” (August 29) And, “Obama’s war in Syria has the potential to widen into a worldwide conflict.” (September 5) And, “Forget Syria and make America great again.” (September 11) And, again, “We should . . . stay out of Syria and other countries that hate us, rebuild our own country and make it strong and great again--USA!” (September 12)
Then, after spending months condemning Hillary Clinton for her intentions to escalate U.S. military aggression in the Middle East--especially in Syria--and assuring the American people that if he were elected President he would NOT try to depose Syria’s President Assad or use increased military force in Syria and elsewhere, and stating that he looked forward to building a closer relationship with Russia and Vladimir Putin, it took him exactly 77 days after being inaugurated to launch 59 Tomahawk missiles into, guess where? Syria! And guess what the pretext was for this military attack? You guessed it: Assad used a chemical attack against his own people. What was it that Yogi Berra said?
You must understand: politicians live in this encapsulated, insulated world in which it is absolutely accepted that the American people cannot remember ANYTHING past yesterday’s FOX or CNN newscasts.
For years, I have been trying to get people to understand that the key agenda driving both parties in Washington, D.C., is WAR. Neocons and neolibs are all about WAR. They can argue and wrangle about social and domestic issues as much as they want, but what unites them is WAR. When will the American people come to realize that there is just ONE PARTY in Washington, D.C.: THE WAR PARTY?
It didn’t take long for the icons of the War Party to begin patting Trump on the back for his attack against Syria. War Party potentates who never had a kind word to say about Donald Trump are now praising him for his “brave” decision to bomb Syria. Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Paul Ryan, and the bulk of War Party propagandists in the mainstream media have joined the chorus lauding Trump’s missile attack. For example, MSNBC’s Brian Williams called the attack “beautiful.”
Even Democrats are not immune from the wrath of the War Party. “Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard went on CNN Friday and said she's not sure Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad was behind the attack. The Iraq War veteran said, ‘I'm skeptical because we have to take at a premium the cost of these wars not only on the Syrian people and the people in the middle east but the cost of these wars here in the United States.’"
No sooner than the words were out of the congresswoman’s mouth, and DNC Chairman Howard Dean fumed, "This is a disgrace. Gabbard should not be in Congress."
But the gritty Gabbard fired back, “Those who've declared Trump a habitual liar now vilify those refusing to blindly follow him into another regime change war. Hypocrisy.”
See the report:
Don’t you see? Republican Party or Democrat Party doesn’t matter; it is the War Party calling the shots.
There is a real correlation here between Donald Trump and Barack Obama. Obama deceived his voting base into believing that he was going to change the Bush war doctrine. He was going to be the “peace” President. But after being elected, Obama ordered ten times more drone attacks than Bush. In 2016 alone, Obama dropped more than 26,000 bombs. He arranged the largest weapons deal in U.S. history to the terrorist regime of Saudi Arabia. And he deployed thousands of U.S. military forces on Russia’s doorstep in Poland. Now, Trump is doing much the same thing.
Donald Trump campaigned on a message of peace and goodwill. But he is governing completely opposite of his campaign rhetoric. He has increased Obama’s military transfers to Saudi Arabia (weapons that are being used to kill thousands of innocent men, women, and children in Yemen). Just last month, Trump carried out more air strikes on Yemen than Obama did in all of 2016. He has increased Obama’s troop strength on Russia’s border. He has sent thousands of troops (including U.S. Special Forces, Marines, and the 82nd Airborne) into Middle Eastern countries--not to mention a massive show of naval power in the Sea of Japan. And now, he has launched a missile attack against Syria.
Acclaimed American journalist Glenn Greenwald wrote, “In the last two months, Trump has ordered a commando raid in Yemen that has massacred children and dozens of innocent people, bombed Mosul and killed scores of civilians, and bombed a mosque near Aleppo that killed dozens.” And that was BEFORE launching missiles against Syria, of course.  
Perhaps the best analysis of Trump’s Syrian missile attack that I’ve seen is provided by “The Saker”:
I don’t think that anybody seriously believes that Assad or anybody else in the Syrian government really ordered a chemical weapons attack on anybody.  To believe that it would require you to find the following sequence logical: first, Assad pretty much wins the war against Daesh which is in full retreat.  Then, the US declares that overthrowing Assad is not a priority anymore (up to here this is all factual and true).  Then, Assad decides to use weapons he does not have.  He decides to bomb a location with no military value, but with lots of kids and cameras.  Then, when the Russians demand a full investigation, the Americans strike as fast as they can before this idea gets any support.  And now the Americans are probing a possible Russian role in this so-called attack.  Frankly, if you believe any of that, you should immediately stop reading and go back to watching TV.  For the rest of us, there are three options:
1. a classical US-executed false flag.
2. a Syrian strike on a location which happened to be storing some kind of gas, possibly chlorine, but most definitely not sarin.  This option requires you to believe in coincidences.  I don’t.  Unless,
3. the US fed bad intelligence to the Syrians and got them to bomb a location where the US knew that toxic gas was stored.
What is evident is that the Syrians did not drop chemical weapons from their aircraft and that no chemical gas was ever stored at the al-Shayrat airbase.  There is no footage showing any munitions or containers which would have delivered the toxic gas.  As for US and other radar recordings, all they can show is that an aircraft was in the sky, its heading, altitude and speed.  There is no way to distinguish a chemical munition or a chemical attack by means of radar.
Whatever option you chose, the Syrian government is obviously and self-evidently innocent of the accusation of having used chemical weapons.
See the report here:  
And we cannot ignore the fact that Donald Trump’s attack on Syria violated international law, the U.S. Constitution, and, most importantly, the Natural Law of God. To again quote “The Saker”:
The US attack happened in direct violation of US law, of international law and of the UN charter.  First, I would say that there is strong legal evidence that the US attack violated the US Constitution, Presidential War Powers Act and the 2001 Authorization of Military Force (AUMF) resolution.  But since I don’t really care about this aspect of Trump’s criminal behavior, I will . . . just simply summarize the argument of those who say that what Trump did was legal.  It boils down to this: “yeah, it’s illegal, but all US Presidents have been doing it for so long that they have thereby created a legal precedent which, uh, makes it legal after all”.  I don’t think this kind of “defense” is worthy of a reply or rebuttal.  So now let’s turn to international law.
Most people think that crimes against humanity or genocide must be the ultimate crime under international law.  They are wrong.  The ultimate crime is aggression.  This is the conclusion of the Nuremberg Trial on this topic:
To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.
I have no idea who “The Saker” is, but he is the only person, other than myself, that I have read who publicly acknowledges that “The Crime of Aggression” is the most serious crime any nation can commit. I reached that conclusion through my study of Natural and Revealed Law. I am guessing “The Saker” came to that conclusion via other studies, but I am proud as a peacock that he had the heart and mind to understand and speak it.
I have a DVD on this topic. It’s called “The Crime Of Aggression: Condemned By The Law Of Nature And Nature’s God.” Find it here:
In my mind, it is no coincidence that Trump has suddenly decided to join the War Party. After Trump betrayed General Michael Flynn and Stephen Bannon (signaling everyone close to him that he will quickly throw anyone under the bus no matter how loyal they are to him--and to the principles he articulated on the campaign trail--and that his word is absolutely meaningless; not to mention the fact that Flynn and Bannon were the two guys Trump appointed to ostensibly keep an eye on “the swamp”), he immediately took counsel from two of his warmongering CFR appointees, General Herbert McMaster and K.T. McFarland. And never lose sight of the fact that Zionist son-in-law Jared Kurshner is the man who, for all intents and purposes, is overseeing Trump’s entire cabinet and overall foreign policy.
Bombing Syria and escalating global military aggression is EXACTLY what Hillary Clinton would have done had she been elected President. Although, I’m not sure she would have done it as quickly as Trump. And you can count on this: if this was President Clinton bombing Syria instead of President Trump, “conservative” radio talk show hosts, websites, and publications would NOT be giving her a pass on it like they are Trump. It seems that’s why the gamemakers let neocon Republicans win elections: they are the ones who are better able to take America into hot wars. “Conservatives” will let a Bush or a Trump do in the war department what they would never let a Clinton or an Obama do. And we MUST face it: talk is indeed cheap. Donald Trump has proven that he is just another neocon warmonger.
Folks, this could get REAL serious REAL fast. Of course, it’s been serious for those poor folks in the Middle East who are the victims of both ISIS and U.S. aggression. If you are a mom or dad living in the Middle East, what difference does it make to you whether your family is killed by ISIS terrorists or American drone and missile attacks? Your family is just as dead. But this could get real serious for the people of the United States as well.
People in America think themselves impervious to the violence and bloodshed taking place all over the world: violence and bloodshed of which we are a major instigator. We are constantly told that America is the “exceptional” nation and that God would never let anything like that happen HERE. We are wrong!
God is VERY angry with the United States. The blood of over 60 million unborn babies cries out from the ground. The Zionist-led war against America’s Christian heritage has totally triumphed, leaving America in the throes of a burgeoning godless, pagan country--no better than any pagan country on earth. For the most part, our churches are little more than carnivals and our pastors carnival barkers. Our economic, education, and political systems are totally corrupt. Our news media are mere puppets and propagandists. The Gospel is thriving in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, and it is dying in Western Europe and the United States. Don’t blame Muslims for the proliferation of mosques in the West; blame Christians.
From Day One, this has been my nagging concern about Donald Trump. No, Hillary Clinton was not an option. (The power elite always make sure that the real options, i.e., Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, et al., are always defeated in the primaries.) But neither is sitting back and excusing Donald Trump’s warmongering an option. The voting public did NOT elect Donald Trump so that he might continue these endless Middle Eastern wars--all fought on behalf of Israel, of course. Neither did they elect him to take us into a nuclear war with Russia.
I like “The Saker’s” take on this, too:
1. The Russians are afraid of war. The Americans are not.
2. The Russians are ready for war. The Americans are not.
If the voting bloc that elected Donald Trump doesn’t stand up LOUDLY and CLEARLY against Trump’s warmongering RIGHT NOW, what was 59 Tomahawk missiles raining down on Syria a few days ago could be scores of ICBMs raining down on the United States a few days from now.
P.S. We carry Major General Smedley Butler’s (USMC) outstanding book, “War Is A Racket,” in our online store. At the time, General Butler was the most decorated soldier in U.S. history. He twice received the Congressional Medal of Honor. He led several successful military operations in the Caribbean and in Central America as well as in Europe during the First World War. Despite his success and his heroic status, however, General Butler came away from these experiences with a deeply troubled view of both the purpose and the results of war.
Read this book, and you will NEVER look at war the same way again. And the book is inexpensive enough that you should get several copies for your friends.
Find General Smedley Butler’s fantastic book, “War Is A Racket,” here: