.

xxx

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

Saturday, May 21, 2016

Castle / Bradley 2016

 C-Span April 24, 2016 | Constitution Party and Third-Party Presidential Bids

Constitution Party 2016 presidential candidate Darrell Castle talked by video from Memphis, Tennessee, about his bid for the presidency, as well as the role of third-party candidates in the 2016 election. 

Castle / Bradley 2016

“It is the nature of the State to seek dominance over the population.   Freedom will not ultimately remain intact if we leave it unattended.  America needs forward thinking leaders — leaders who do not apologize to the politically-correct demands of the thought police.   Self-hatred and appeasement only foster more disrespect.  We must find a way to chart our own course in the world as free and independent people.” - Darrel Castle



Liberty-Pac: Quick note, Comfortably numb from this past weeks events and thinking strategies in these AM hours hummm.... I believe I will miss all this, being right here at this moment in time, many many years from now. It is truly an extraordinary time to be alive.

The present generation must continue the struggle for Liberty in our time. For this is not a single battle to be waged in the war of ideas, but a series of battles in our great generational struggle to liberate mankind from the hands of tyranny and oppression.

Future generations will one day emulate and build off the great works we accomplished in our day. Stay the course, pursue the goal and never give up.

“Let us disappoint the men who are raising themselves upon the ruin of this country.” ~John Adams~








Sunday, October 25, 2015

Ron Paul's Final Warning


Video: Ron Paul's Final Final Warning

PDF: Ron Pauls Final Warning 
Stansberry Research | 2015
Publication: America 2020 PDF
Survival Blueprint: Frequently Asked Questions

“Ron Paul former U.S. Presidential candidate and 22-year Congressman predicts the next huge disaster for America—worse than 2008, Black Monday and Great Depression—and how you should prepare to protect yourself, your family and your finances.”


“Stansberry Research is an independent financial research firm, recently partnered with former Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, delivering unbiased investment intelligence to self-directed investors seeking an edge in a wide variety of sectors and market conditions. Stansberry experts produce a steady stream of timely research that covers topics such as value investing, maximizing income, energy-sector investing, resources, biotech, medical technologies, financials, technology, short-selling, macroeconomic analysis, and options trading. Stansberry’s unrelenting and compromised insight of market trends and analysis has made it one of the most respected and sought-after research organizations in the financial sector.


Founded in 1999 and based out of Baltimore, Maryland, Stansberry Research has nearly two dozen analysts and researchers– including former hedge-fund managers and buy-side financial experts – who publish proprietary insights to more than 350,000 individual subscribers in more than 100 countries.”











Sunday, March 16, 2014

APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON



Liberty-Pac: Apotheosis Of Washington  a fascinating piece of art work located in the eye of the US. Capitol rotunda. The painting depicts Washington rising to the heavens in glory and surrounded by Mythical Gods and Goddesses. By: Constantino Brumidi in ( 1865 ) NOTE: (The word "apotheosis" in the title means literally the raising of a person to the rank of a god, or the glorification of a person as an ideal; George Washington was honored as a national icon in the nineteenth century.)

kids.clerk.house.gov Quote: “Constantino Brumidi painted The Apotheosis of Washington on the ceiling of the Rotunda, the center of the Capitol, in 1865. He used a fresco technique in which water-based paints are applied to freshly spread plaster.

The subjects shown in the dome mix individuals from American history, gods of Roman mythology and personifications—abstract concepts illustrated as a person. This mixture of history and myth was a common way to show abstract ideas in art in the 19th century, and would have been easily grasped by viewers at the time.

The center of the painting shows George Washington rising into the heavens in glory. Female personifications of Liberty and Victory or Fame are at his sides. Thirteen maidens, symbolizing the thirteen original states, circle the three central figures. The groups around the perimeter of the main scene illustrate important aspects of America, and tell the viewer what the nation prided itself in during the 19th century. Innovation and industry are important recurring themes.” End Quote

Reference: http://kids.clerk.house.gov/high-school/lesson.html?intID=40
Reference: http://www.aoc.gov/capitol-hill/other-paintings-and-murals/apotheosis-Washington







Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Fifty or One


By: Rob James | December 26, 2011

“Is it better to have Tyranny from THE STATE or Tyranny from A State? Do you want one way or fifty ways to have your rights violated? Do you want one dictator or fifty? I ask these questions so that you'll think about the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Constitution, and how we should define States' Rights. In the 9th Amendment it states: 

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." 

In the 10th Amendment it states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

In the Declaration of Independence, it speaks of things like 'Laws of Nature', 'unalienable Rights' and 'free People'; but how do we apply these things to the Constitution, or more specifically, with the Bill of Rights? If the primary purpose of government is to protect the rights and property of a free people (those who have given it the authority to do so), and individuals have rights that are unalienable and partially defined in the Bill of Rights, would a state have any more authority to control the lives of an individual than the Federal government does? No, states are entrusted with the same protective authority as the Federal government, they exist to protect the rights and property of it's people. So if it is wrong for THE STATE to infringe on your rights, it would also be wrong for A State to do the same. A state operates as a mini-republic within the Union, with the same responsibility for protecting your rights as the Federal government.

That being said, what decisions are left for a state to make under the 9th and 10th Amendments, that are not 'reserved by the people"? Who you can associate with, who you can marry, what you can do with your body, what you can put in your body, what you can do with your property (and other personal decisions like this), do not belong to any level of government, they belong to "the people"; and the only reason for any level of government to get involved with these personal decisions, is when the actions of one individual infringe on the rights of another individual. So when someone says that the individual States (not the Federal government), should decide issues of marriage, drug prohibition, etc, they infer that the States have the authority to violate your individual rights.”



Wednesday, July 6, 2011

RON PAUL REVOLUTION


United States Congressman Ron Paul, leading the charge for a return to Constitutional Government in these United States.

RON PAUL 2012

Monday, February 21, 2011

The Patriot - Act - The Anti-Fourth Amendment

By: Rob James | February 19, 2011


“Whenever I think about the Patriot Act, I get angered and I feel an acidic bile of disgust rise in my throat. This legislation should anger every patriot, but unfortunately most Americans have become the obedient, blind, scared sheep, that our government has worked so hard to train and domesticate.I believe that the Patriot Act should be renamed the 

Anti-Fourth Amendment Act. It is blantently, in your face, look-at-me I'm violating the law of the land, UNCONSTITUTIONAL! 


It says we are not secure in our houses, papers, and effects; it says we are not protected against unreasonable searches and seizures; it upholds the belief that we are Guilty until proven Innocent; it shows that our government believes that it has the power to bestow, or take away, the rights of a person.

The 4th Amendment of the Constitution states: "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 oath of office for elected government officials states: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

Every politician that votes for the Patriot Act, votes to attack your Liberty and votes against the 4th Amendment, thereby violating their oath of office. Every politician that violates their oath of office, should be considered a treasonous domestic enemy and removed from office.

In case you're not sure what it is about the Patriot Act that is so vile to me, it includes provisions that authorizes the FBI to use roving wiretaps on surveillance targets, it grants the government access to “any tangible items” of individuals under surveillance, and allows the surveillance of individuals and groups not connected to identified terrorist groups.

Everyone that believes that the Patriot Act is needed, is acting out of a fear that is generated and reinforced by our politicans and the Main Stream Media. I believe as our founding fathers did, that Liberty is much more important than Security, and I for one, am not willing to trade one for the other. For those who support this detestable legislation, you are supporting slavery...your slavery, my slavery and the slavery of every American, and for this, you are an enemy of liberty. I will defer to the words of Samuel Adams, who said: "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."

The Patriot Act is a hypocritical gesture from our politicans who claim to be spreading freedom across the world and defending Liberty, while they strip away the rights and liberties of their own people. I will end with the words of Benjamin Franklin "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Read Here

2011 USA PATRIOT ACT REAUTHORIZATION *ROLL CALL* VOTE