Obama Taking Up Where Bush Left Off

Comments Off on Obama Taking Up Where Bush Left Off

As you read this you must ask yourself………….I thought we had a Constitution with a 4th amendment that 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.


By Chuck Baldwin

Obama Taking Up Where Bush Left Off

It is truly amazing how much news the American news media chooses to ignore. If one wants to discover what is actually going on in the world, he or she often has to go to the foreign press. This has again been the case with a story that every American should be extremely interested in, but which has been totally ignored by the American news media. I found this story in Russia Today.

According to RussiaToday.com, “The personal computer may soon be not-so-private, with the U.S. and some European nations working on laws allowing them access to search the content held on a person’s hard drive.

“President Obama’s administration is keeping unusually tight-lipped on the details, which is raising concerns among computer users and liberty activists.”

The report also states, In extreme secrecy from the public, the United States is hammering out an international copyright treaty with several other countries and the European Union. Under the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (or ACTA), governments will get sweeping new powers to search and seize material thought to be in breach of copyright. But why all the secrecy?”

Russia Today quotes Richard Stallman, prominent American software freedom activist, as saying, “Democracy gets bypassed and they can do to us whatever they want. I can only guess that it’s going to be nasty, because if it weren’t going to be nasty, they wouldn’t need to keep it a secret.”

The report also said, Up until now, the breach of copyright has been a civil matter. The Obama administration seems to now want to criminalize it.”

The report continued saying, “Some say modern America is being overtaken by a culture of surveillance.”

A culture of surveillance indeed. What began in earnest under former President George W. Bush is now sharply escalating under President Barack Obama.

According to Ecommerce Journal, President Obama and his Big Brother fellow travelers in Congress are seeking power to “cut the whole world off the Internet. The report says, “Senators John Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe proposed the Cybersecurity Act that would create the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor. Its powers are detailed in the The Cybersecurity Act of 2009.

“If the President so chooses, he can call a ‘cybersecurity emergency’ and shut down or limit any ‘net traffic or a ‘critical’ network ‘in the name of national security,’ though the bill fails to provide concrete definitions on what is ‘critical’ or what constitutes an ’emergency.’

The report goes on to say, “This new legislation seeks to give even more power to the government to regulate the Internet and, in future, the possibility to regulate content and usage. (I must ask, why are we turning over so much authority to the president, the internet, firing CEOs of public companies,control of the census, stakes in banks, what is wrong with us?)

What begins as a method of defeating terrorism and protecting telecommunications, can quickly become a method to regulate ‘hate speech’ to assign ‘motive’ or ‘intent’ to harm and even to regulate and legislate the flow of information that is deemed by the ‘thought police’ to be inflammatory or counter-productive to their cause.”

The report says that the new cybersecurity legislation can be a “framework for future, more invasive legislation. It is a first step to the loss of internet privacy, free speech and the free flow of information.”

So, once again, the passing of a Republican Presidential administration and the advent of a Democratic Presidential administration have resulted in zero change in the overall direction of the ship of state. In the name of “national security,” the federal government of this country continues to deepen its commitment to what can only be described as a police-state mentality. And, once again, the national news media in America chooses to ignore the story, and by so doing, shows willful compliance with this disturbing phenomenon.

I wonder how many Obama supporters are paying attention?

During the Bush years, my “conservative” brethren (especially the ones calling themselves Christians) repeatedly turned a blind eye and deaf ear to the myriad foibles and falsehoods, and frequent fraudulence of President Bush because he was a Republican. Now we will see how many Obama supporters will look the other way in order to protect President Obama because he is a Democrat. I suspect most of them will show themselves of no better character than the Bush supporters.

Entire article at Newswithviews.com


Gore equates global warming skeptics with Bernie Madoff

1 Comment

Gore equates global warming skeptics with Bernie Madoff

Former VP Al Gore compared scientists who question global warming with indicted stock swindler Bernie Madoff Friday, arguing that they are all guilty of perpetuating a fraud.

Al Gore Refused to Take Energy Reduction Pledge

During testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the VP turned environmental advocate got into a brief verbal tussle with global warming skeptic Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) who questioned Gore’s statistics about carbon emissions.

“It is important to look at sources of science you rely on,” Gore told Barton. “With all due respect, I believe you have relied on people you have trusted who have given you bad information. I don’t blame the investors who trusted Bernie Madoff but he gave them bad information.”

Gore also took aim Global Climate Coalition, which represents the oil and coal industry, calling the group the “Bernie Madoff’s of global warming.”

Republican Joe Barton v. Al Gore

The NY Times reports today that the group ignored it’s own scientific advice in trying to keep alive doubts about the science behind climate change.

“They have committed a fraud larger than Madoff’s fraud….they lied to people who trusted them in order to make money,” Gore said.

Gore’s assault on global warming skeptics came as the House deliberates a “cap and trade” bill sponsored by Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Ed Markey (D-MA) that would mandate carbon emission cuts.

Gore lauded the energy bill as “one of the most important pieces of legislation ever introduced in the Congress,” and compared it to landmark legislation including the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe after WWII and 1960s Civil Rights bill.

“This bill will simultaneously address the climate crisis, the economic crisis, and the national security threats that stem from our dependence on foreign oil,” he said in his opening statement to the committee.

“We cannot afford to wait any longer for this transition. Each day that we continue with the status quo sees more of our fellow Americans struggling to provide for their families. Each day that we continue on our path, America loses more of its competitive edge. And each day we wait, we increase the risk that we will leave our children and grandchildren an irreparably damaged planet,” Gore said. “Passage of this legislation will restore America’s leadership of the world and begin, at long last, to solve the climate crisis. It is truly a moral imperative. Moreover, the scientific evidence of how serious this climate crisis is becoming continues to amass week after week.”

Gore’s testimony caps off four days of hearings on the legislation. Former VA Sen. John Warner and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich also testified before the committee Friday.


Swine Flu Container Explodes on Train


Well I guess we’re just shipping “live swine flu virus” all over the world. Since this was packed in dry ice this must have been a live virus.

Swine Flu Container Explodes on Train

When a container holding swine flu exploded on a Swiss train on Monday, it could have led to a nightmare scenario. Luckily the virus was not the mutated swine flu that has killed around 150 people in Mexico and that has already spread to parts of Europe.

It has all the hallmarks of a disaster movie: A container filled with the swine flu virus explodes on a busy train. But that’s exactly the scenario that briefly caused the Swiss authorities some alarm on Monday evening. In the midst of global fears of a swine flu pandemic, a container with swine flu exploded on a train carrying over 60 people.

The Intercity train is seen in Lausanne station after it had been evacuated.


The Intercity train is seen in Lausanne station after it had been evacuated.

Luckily, however, it was not the mutated swine flu virus that has killed around 150 people in Mexico. The police quickly reassured the public that there was no danger of any infection.

According to the police, a lab technician with the Swiss National Center for Influenza in Geneva had travelled to Zurich to collect eight ampoules, five of which were filled with the H1N1 swine flu virus. The samples were to be used to develop a test for swine flu infections.

The containers were hermetically sealed and cooled with dry ice. However, it seems the dry ice was not packed correctly and it melted during the journey. The gas coming from the containers then built up too much pressure and the ampoules exploded, as the train was pulling into a station.

After consulting with a virologist, the police stopped the train just before Lausanne station and evacuated it, taking the precaution to isolate all those on board for one hour. A specialist for infectious diseases then reassured all those involved that the particular strain of swine flu on the train posed no risk for humans.

Taking no chances, the police took the contact details of all the passengers before allowing them to continue on their journey.


U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net ‘Fairness Doctrine’

Comments Off on U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net ‘Fairness Doctrine’

WND Exclusive


U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net ‘Fairness Doctrine’

Cass Sunstein sees Web as anti-democratic, proposed 24-hour delay on sending e-mail

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Cass Sunstein

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama’s nominee for “regulatory czar” has advocated a “Fairness Doctrine” for the Internet that would require opposing opinions be linked and also has suggested angry e-mails should be prevented from being sent by technology that would require a 24-hour cooling off period.

The revelations about Cass Sunstein, Obama’s friend from the University of Chicago Law School and nominee to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, come in a new book by Brad O’Leary, “Shut Up, America! The End of Free Speech.” OIRA will oversee regulation throughout the U.S. government.

Sunstein also has argued in his prolific literary works that the Internet is anti-democratic because of the way users can filter out information of their own choosing.

“A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government,” he wrote. “Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom’s name.”

Sunstein first proposed the notion of imposing mandatory “electronic sidewalks” for the Net. These “sidewalks” would display links to opposing viewpoints. Adam Thierer, senior fellow and director of the Center for Digital Media Freedom at the Progress and Freedom Center, has characterized the proposal as “The Fairness Doctrine for the Internet.”

“Apparently in Sunstein’s world, people have many rights, but one of them, it seems, is not the right to be left alone or seek out the opinions one desires,” Thierer wrote.

Later, Sunstein rethought his proposal, explaining that it would be “too difficult to regulate [the Internet] in a way that would respond to those concerns.” He also acknowledged that it was “almost certainly unconstitutional.”

Perhaps Sunstein’s most novel idea regarding the Internet was his proposal, in his book “Nudge,” written with Richard Thaler, for a “Civility Check” for e-mails and other online communications.

“The modern world suffers from insufficient civility,” they wrote. “Every hour of every day, people send angry e-mails they soon regret, cursing people they barely know (or even worse, their friends and loved ones). A few of us have learned a simple rule: don’t send an angry e-mail in the heat of the moment. File it, and wait a day before you send it. (In fact, the next day you may have calmed down so much that you forget even to look at it. So much the better.) But many people either haven’t learned the rule or don’t always follow it. Technology could easily help. In fact, we have no doubt that technologically savvy types could design a helpful program by next month.”

That’s where the “Civility Check” comes in.

“We propose a Civility Check that can accurately tell whether the e-mail you’re about to send is angry and caution you, ‘warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. do you really and truly want to send it?'” they wrote. “(Software already exists to detect foul language. What we are proposing is more subtle, because it is easy to send a really awful e-mail message that does not contain any four-letter words.) A stronger version, which people could choose or which might be the default, would say, ‘warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. this will not be sent unless you ask to resend in 24 hours.’ With the stronger version, you might be able to bypass the delay with some work (by inputting, say, your Social Security number and your grandfather’s birth date, or maybe by solving some irritating math problem!).”

Sunstein’s nomination to the powerful new position will require Senate approval. He is almost certain to face other questions about his well-documented controversial views:

  • In a 2007 speech at Harvard he called for banning hunting in the U.S.
  • In his book “Radicals in Robes,” he wrote: “[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms.”
  • In his 2004 book, “Animal Rights,” he wrote: “Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives …”
  • In “Animal Rights: A Very Short Primer,” he wrote “[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, in scientific experiments, and in agriculture.”

“As one of America’s leading constitutional scholars, Cass Sunstein has distinguished himself in a range of fields, including administrative law and policy, environmental law, and behavioral economics,” said Obama at his nomination of his regulatory czar. “He is uniquely qualified to lead my administration’s regulatory reform agenda at this crucial stage in our history. Cass is not only a valued adviser, he is a dear friend and I am proud to have him on my team.”

O’Leary disagrees.

“It’s hard to imagine President Obama nominating a more dangerous candidate for regulatory czar than Cass Sunstein,” he says. “Not only is Sunstein an animal-rights radical, but he also seems to have a serious problem with our First Amendment rights. Sunstein has advocated everything from regulating the content of personal e-mail communications, to forcing nonprofit groups to publish information on their websites that is counter to their beliefs and mission. Of course, none of this should be surprising from a man who has said that ‘limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government.’ If it were up to Obama and Sunstein, everything we read online – right down to our personal e-mail communications – would have to be inspected and approved by the federal government.”

For media inquiries for Brad O’Leary, please send an e-mail here.