THIS WEEK ON WAKING UP ORWELL
::: PODCAST:::
Waking Up Orwell's 2 hour Immigration & Police State special
Interview start times are in bold.
1st hour - News magazine coverage of this week's chronicle of dystopia followed by instructions on how to assert your rights over a police interaction with Scott Morgan of FlexYourRights. org. (@42:44)
2nd Hour - Alex Norwrasteh, an analyst for Competetive Enterprise Institute (@01:06:28) covers the nasty business of Immigration and Arizona's police state bill, SB 1070. He also exposes the anti-immigrant movement as a pan-partisan strategy initiated and sustained by the type of Global Green who are in favor of eugenics. Why? To depopulate North America. How it plays out shocked me and I know it will surprise anyone who listens. It will change the way you see Republicans, Progressives and the way you've interpreted social darwinism in the past.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
DOUBLE FEATURE: Immigration & Police State special
Labels:news, identity, data surveillance
Arizona,
CEI,
database state,
Facebook,
Flex Your Rights,
immigration,
police state bill,
SB 1070,
Scott Morgan,
surveillance
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
9 Students Arrested in AZ SB 1070 protests
"Nine brave students chained themselves to the Az State Capitol on April 20, 2010 to send Gov. Brewer a message: VETO APARTHEID BILL SB 1070. They were all arrested and hauled off to Sheriff Arpaio's jail.
They have called for Non-Violent Direct Action until the Governor veto the bill or 90 days until it becomes law. Major Boycotts are also being planned against Arizona if it passes like this Nation has never seen.
Arizona is becoming a Police State were any and everyone with brown skin will be required to show papers and avoid or turn in anyone they suspect of being undocumented. This could include those taking a relative to the hospital or church.
Lobbyists groups like FAIR that helped write the bill stand to make Millions off the Az Tax payers as they conveniently helped write it so racists can sue any town, city or agency they feel isn't enforcing this fascist law to their satisfaction.
Instead of dealing with the real causes of our border problems (NAFTA ) our racist Republican leadership wants to try more of the same like a crack addict who thinks all will be well if only he can have more. Senator Russell Pearce, the bills sponsor has been exposed as having ties with neo-Nazi and openly associates with hate groups. He used false data pulled mostly from anti immigrant websites most of which is easily proved to be false. "
Labels:news, identity, data surveillance
Arizona,
citizenship,
human rights abuses,
identity abuses
Crime Prediction Software Is Here and It's a Very Bad Idea
BTC- Thanks to Jim Paulson for sending this one over.
c/o Gizmodo, Jesus Diaz >> Blacklisted News
The Florida State Department of Juvenile Justice will use analysis software to predict crime by young delinquents, putting potential offenders under specific prevention and education programs. Goodbye, human rights!
They will use this software on juvenile delinquents, using a series of variables to determine the potential for these people to commit another crime. Depending on this probability, they will put them under specific re-education programs. Deepak Advani—vice president of predictive analytics at IBM—says the system gives "reliable projections" so governments can take "action in real time" to "prevent criminal activities?"
Really? "Reliable projections"? "Action in real time"? "Preventing criminal activities"? I don't know about how reliable your system is, IBM, but have you ever heard of the 5th, the 6th, and the 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution? What about article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? No? Let's make this easy then: Didn't you watch that scientology nutcase in Minority Report?
Sure. Some will argue that these juvenile delinquents were already convicted for other crimes, so hey, there's no harm. This software will help prevent further crimes. It will make all of us safer? But would it? Where's the guarantee of that? Why does the state have to assume that criminal behavior is a given? And why should the government decide who goes to an specific prevention program or who doesn't based on what a computer says? The fact is that, even if the software was 99.99% accurate, there will be always an innocent person who will be fucked. And that is exactly why we have something called due process and the presumption of innocence. That's why those things are not only in the United States Constitution, but in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights too. :::MORE HERE:::
c/o Gizmodo, Jesus Diaz >> Blacklisted News
The Florida State Department of Juvenile Justice will use analysis software to predict crime by young delinquents, putting potential offenders under specific prevention and education programs. Goodbye, human rights!
They will use this software on juvenile delinquents, using a series of variables to determine the potential for these people to commit another crime. Depending on this probability, they will put them under specific re-education programs. Deepak Advani—vice president of predictive analytics at IBM—says the system gives "reliable projections" so governments can take "action in real time" to "prevent criminal activities?"
Really? "Reliable projections"? "Action in real time"? "Preventing criminal activities"? I don't know about how reliable your system is, IBM, but have you ever heard of the 5th, the 6th, and the 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution? What about article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? No? Let's make this easy then: Didn't you watch that scientology nutcase in Minority Report?
Sure. Some will argue that these juvenile delinquents were already convicted for other crimes, so hey, there's no harm. This software will help prevent further crimes. It will make all of us safer? But would it? Where's the guarantee of that? Why does the state have to assume that criminal behavior is a given? And why should the government decide who goes to an specific prevention program or who doesn't based on what a computer says? The fact is that, even if the software was 99.99% accurate, there will be always an innocent person who will be fucked. And that is exactly why we have something called due process and the presumption of innocence. That's why those things are not only in the United States Constitution, but in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights too. :::MORE HERE:::
Labels:news, identity, data surveillance
criminal justice U.S. Constitution,
human rights,
IBM
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Privacy and Civil Liberties Board still sits empty
c/o Los Angeles Times
Suppose Congress created a board to protect the privacy of Americans and no one showed up. That's the bizarre reality of the five-member Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, all of whose five seats have been vacant since 2008. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice) is pressing the Obama administration to fill the vacancies. In doing so, the president should choose individuals of sufficient experience and stature to act as watchdogs over the intelligence community and the Justice Department.
The board was originally established by Congress in 2004 and was raised to the status of an independent agency within the executive branch in 2007. Its mandate is to advise the administration when anti-terrorism policies threaten to trample civil liberties, and it has access to both public and classified information. It's meant to complement, not replace, congressional oversight and investigations by the inspectors general of the Justice Department and the CIA. It also makes an annual report to Congress — or would, if it were reconstituted with new appointments.
Although it was the George W. Bush administration that inaugurated the illegal wiretapping of Americans suspected of being in contact with foreign terrorists, invasions of privacy are a constant danger in any intelligence program empowered to collect and scrutinize the personal and electronic records of U.S. citizens. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is designed to help protect against abuses in advance so that we don't have to conduct inquests after the fact.
Appropriately, anti-terrorism measures constantly are being refined to address new challenges. In a letter to Obama, Harman and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, cite policy changes proposed after the attempted destruction of an airliner on Christmas, including expanded watch lists and increased use of body-scanning technology at airports.
It would be naïve to think that the board always will prevail in its recommendations to Congress or the administration. Nor is it the only brake on ill-considered or legally dubious anti-terrorism initiatives. In addition to various inspectors general, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel is supposed to advise the administration and federal agencies of the legal limits on counter-intelligence operations and other tactics in the war on terrorism.
Stung by criticism of its inaction, the administration insists that it is considering candidates for the three Democratic seats on the board and expects congressional Republicans to recommend nominees for the other two seats soon. Better late than never, but the empty seats at the table more than a year into the Obama administration are an embarrassment.
Suppose Congress created a board to protect the privacy of Americans and no one showed up. That's the bizarre reality of the five-member Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, all of whose five seats have been vacant since 2008. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice) is pressing the Obama administration to fill the vacancies. In doing so, the president should choose individuals of sufficient experience and stature to act as watchdogs over the intelligence community and the Justice Department.
The board was originally established by Congress in 2004 and was raised to the status of an independent agency within the executive branch in 2007. Its mandate is to advise the administration when anti-terrorism policies threaten to trample civil liberties, and it has access to both public and classified information. It's meant to complement, not replace, congressional oversight and investigations by the inspectors general of the Justice Department and the CIA. It also makes an annual report to Congress — or would, if it were reconstituted with new appointments.
Although it was the George W. Bush administration that inaugurated the illegal wiretapping of Americans suspected of being in contact with foreign terrorists, invasions of privacy are a constant danger in any intelligence program empowered to collect and scrutinize the personal and electronic records of U.S. citizens. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is designed to help protect against abuses in advance so that we don't have to conduct inquests after the fact.
Appropriately, anti-terrorism measures constantly are being refined to address new challenges. In a letter to Obama, Harman and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, cite policy changes proposed after the attempted destruction of an airliner on Christmas, including expanded watch lists and increased use of body-scanning technology at airports.
It would be naïve to think that the board always will prevail in its recommendations to Congress or the administration. Nor is it the only brake on ill-considered or legally dubious anti-terrorism initiatives. In addition to various inspectors general, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel is supposed to advise the administration and federal agencies of the legal limits on counter-intelligence operations and other tactics in the war on terrorism.
Stung by criticism of its inaction, the administration insists that it is considering candidates for the three Democratic seats on the board and expects congressional Republicans to recommend nominees for the other two seats soon. Better late than never, but the empty seats at the table more than a year into the Obama administration are an embarrassment.
Labels:news, identity, data surveillance
Bush Administration,
civil liberties oversight board,
Obama Administration,
privacy concerns
School district admits to webcam spying
"It's clear there were students who were likely captured in their homes," said lawyer Henry Hockeimer, who represents the Lower Merion School District.
None of the images, captured by a tracking program to find missing computers, appeared to be salacious or inappropriate, he said. The district said it remotely activated the tracking software to find 80 missing laptops in the past two years. ::: MORE HERE:::
AZ SB 1070: Brewer takes time considering veto, has "concerns"
BTC - SB 1070 is not law as of 4/20/2010.
c/o The Arizona Republic
Arizona lawmakers on Monday approved one of the toughest illegal immigration laws in the United States.
The immigration bill now heads to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who has five days to sign it, veto it or do nothing and allow it to become law. Brewer said she’d be reviewing the legislation over the next several days, indicating that she will probably take the maximum time allowed to her before taking action.
Arizona Senate Bill 1070 would, among other things, make it a state crime to be in the country illegally and require local police to enforce federal-immigration laws. If the governor signs it, Arizona would be the first state to criminalize illegal immigrants.
Brewer, speaking to media at an unrelated news conference Monday morning, said she had “concerns” about SB 1070.
“I am always concerned about all of those things,” Brewer said when asked about several specific provisions of the bill, including one that would require police to ask anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally to produce an “alien registration document” such as a green card. Those who don’t or can’t produce one would be charged with a Class 1 misdemeanor and face a minimum $500 fine.
“I’ll look at it, go over it and review it completely when it hits my desk,” she said. :::MORE HERE:::
c/o The Arizona Republic
Arizona lawmakers on Monday approved one of the toughest illegal immigration laws in the United States.
The immigration bill now heads to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who has five days to sign it, veto it or do nothing and allow it to become law. Brewer said she’d be reviewing the legislation over the next several days, indicating that she will probably take the maximum time allowed to her before taking action.
Arizona Senate Bill 1070 would, among other things, make it a state crime to be in the country illegally and require local police to enforce federal-immigration laws. If the governor signs it, Arizona would be the first state to criminalize illegal immigrants.
Brewer, speaking to media at an unrelated news conference Monday morning, said she had “concerns” about SB 1070.
“I am always concerned about all of those things,” Brewer said when asked about several specific provisions of the bill, including one that would require police to ask anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally to produce an “alien registration document” such as a green card. Those who don’t or can’t produce one would be charged with a Class 1 misdemeanor and face a minimum $500 fine.
[WHAT IF YOU CAN'T PRODUCE A GREEN CARD, AS YOU DON'T OWN A GREEN CARD BECAUSE YOU ARE A U.S. CITIZEN?]Still, Brewer declined to give any indication as to whether she would sign or veto the legislation, which has gotten national attention. If she signs the bill, it would go into effect 90 days after the session ends.
“I’ll look at it, go over it and review it completely when it hits my desk,” she said. :::MORE HERE:::
Nevada beats the chip, drops Real ID mandate
Real ID Licenses Will Now Be Optional
c/o KXNT news radio
High-security drivers licenses will soon be an option for Nevada drivers. That's the word from Department of Motor Vehicles Director Edgar Roberts, who told a Legislative panel Monday the controversial "Real ID" program will no longer be mandatory. In January, Governor Jim Gibbons made the program mandatory in Nevada by executive order. But the high-security licenses have caused long lines at DMV offices, and sparked criticism from opponents who say the program intrudes into personal lives. Lawmakers could endorse Roberts' plan by the end of the month. Nevada has spent about two million dollars to implement the "Real ID" program, and so far, 46-thousand drivers have opted for the high-security cards.
c/o KXNT news radio
High-security drivers licenses will soon be an option for Nevada drivers. That's the word from Department of Motor Vehicles Director Edgar Roberts, who told a Legislative panel Monday the controversial "Real ID" program will no longer be mandatory. In January, Governor Jim Gibbons made the program mandatory in Nevada by executive order. But the high-security licenses have caused long lines at DMV offices, and sparked criticism from opponents who say the program intrudes into personal lives. Lawmakers could endorse Roberts' plan by the end of the month. Nevada has spent about two million dollars to implement the "Real ID" program, and so far, 46-thousand drivers have opted for the high-security cards.
Labels:news, identity, data surveillance
Government,
local,
national ID Real ID,
Nevada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
