Government concealing the truth-FDA and more

O.k. so we are gonna rip of George Washington from George Washingtons Blog again.
And yes the video is from Democracy now. But don't let your panties crackle.
A few post down you will see we posted a vid from Fox news.

We don't much care where we get the truth about how you are being screwed as long as
we can verify it and then get it to you. George Washington abides by our tradition of
heavily linking his posts to outside resources so that by the time you get finished reading
them all, which of course nobody does because after all it's not a two minute sound byte
from a fwd, fwd, fwd, e-mail proved false by Snopes 6 years ago (but alas we never
learn and keep trying to give the truth power),you should have enough info to make an
intelligent decision on your own based on what is and not what the paid political hacks
want you to believe. First the vid.
  
And now for a whole bunch of interesting stuff about the video: When one of the most
respected radiologists  in America – the former head of the radiology department at Yale University – attempted to blow the whistle on the fact that the FDA had approved a
medical device manufactured by General Electric because it put out massive amounts of
radiation, the FDA installed spyware to record his private emails and surfing activities
(including installing cameras to snap pictures of his screen), and then used the
information to smear him and other whistleblowers.

The next way for government to take your money

As reported in February Forbes magazine: Last year in Vallego, Calif. 18 cops and firefighters retired unexpectedly. The city couldn't afford it and declared bankruptcy.  Bye Bye pensions/retirement. Under Federal bankruptcy law cities can propose their own reorganization plans and void contracts without liquidating assests.  Meaning you can get anything from pennies on the dollar to zip back from your pension plan.

Of course your state or city would not do that to their workers would they???Add to Technorati Favorites

This is not how America is upposed to Operate

"Although the independent report on the surveillance released last week said that it was part of a broad effort by the state police to gather information on protest groups across the state,"

The Above is from the article below. There is no basis for police or any investigation into any group of protesters that has no history or evidence of violence.  There is Precedence however, in Nazi Germany, Communist China, the old Soviet Union and America. 

The difference was our forefathers threw off the shackles of totalitarianism. Do we now kneel down and meekly put the chains back on?

 Washington Post:
The Maryland State Police classified 53 nonviolent activists as terrorists and entered their names and personal information into state and federal databases that track terrorism suspects, the state police chief acknowledged yesterday. Police Superintendent Terrence B. Sheridan revealed at a legislative hearing that the surveillance operation, which targeted opponents of the death penalty and the Iraq war, was far more extensive than was known when its existence was disclosed in July.

The department started sending letters of notification Saturday to the activists, inviting them to review their files before they are purged from the databases, Sheridan said.

"The names don't belong in there," he told the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. "It's as simple as that."

The surveillance took place over 14 months in 2005 and 2006, under the administration of former governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R). The former state police superintendent who authorized the operation, Thomas E. Hutchins, defended the program in testimony yesterday. Hutchins said the program was a bulwark against potential violence and called the activists "fringe people."

Sheridan said protest groups were also entered as terrorist organizations in the databases, but his staff has not identified which ones.

Stunned senators pressed Sheridan to apologize to the activists for the spying, assailed in an independent review last week as "overreaching" by law enforcement officials who were oblivious to their violation of the activists' rights of free expression and association.

Hutchins told the committee it was not accurate to describe the program as spying. "I doubt anyone who has used that term has ever met a spy," he told the committee.

"What John Walker did is spying," Hutchins said, referring to John Walker Jr., a communications specialist for the U.S. Navy convicted of selling secrets to the Soviet Union. Hutchins said the intelligence agents, whose logs were obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland as part of a lawsuit, were monitoring "open public meetings." His officers sought a "situational awareness" of the potential for disruption as death penalty opponents prepared to protest the executions of two men on death row, Hutchins said.

"I don't believe the First Amendment is any guarantee to those who wish to disrupt the government," he said. Hutchins said he did not notify Ehrlich about the surveillance. Ehrlich spokesman Henry Fawell said the governor had no comment.

Hutchins did not name the commander in the Division of Homeland Security and Intelligence who informed him in March 2005 that the surveillance had begun. More than a year later, after "they said, 'We're not getting much here,' " Hutchins said he cut off what he called a "low-level operation."

But Sen. James Brochin (D-Baltimore County) noted that undercover troopers used aliases to infiltrate organizational meetings, rallies and group e-mail lists. He called the spying a "deliberate infiltration to find out every piece of information necessary" on groups such as the Maryland Campaign to End the Death Penalty and the Baltimore Pledge of Resistance. When Hutchins called their members "fringe people," the audience of activists who filled the seats in the hearing room in Annapolis sighed.

 Some activists said yesterday that they have received letters; others said they were waiting with anticipation to see whether they were on the state police watch list.

Laura Lising of Catonsville, a member of the Baltimore Coalition Against the Death Penalty, received her notification yesterday. She said she wants a hard copy of her file, because she does not trust the police to purge it. "We need as much protection as possible," she said.

Both Hutchins and Sheridan said the activists' names were entered into the state police database as terrorists partly because the software offered limited options for classifying entries.

The police also entered the activists' names into the federal Washington-Baltimore High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area database, which tracks suspected terrorists. One well-known antiwar activist from Baltimore, Max Obuszewski, was singled out in the intelligence logs released by the ACLU, which described a "primary crime" of "terrorism-anti-government" and a "secondary crime" of "terrorism-anti-war protesters.


Sheridan said that he did not think the names were circulated to other agencies in the federal system and that they are not on the federal government's terrorist watch list. Hutchins said some names might have been shared with the National Security Agency. 

Although the independent report on the surveillance released last week said that it was part of a broad effort by the state police to gather information on protest groups across the state, Sheridan said the department is not aware of any surveillance as "intrusive" as the spying on death penalty and war opponents.

The police notified the protesters at the recommendation of former U.S. attorney and state attorney general Stephen H. Sachs, who was appointed by Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) to review the covert monitoring. In a report last week, Sachs also recommended regulations that forbid such spying on protest groups unless the state police chief believes it is justified.


"I can't imagine getting a letter that says, 'You've been classified as a terrorist; come in and we'll tell about it,'" said Sen. Bryan W. Simonaire (R-Anne Arundel). Two senators noted that they had been arrested years ago for civil disobedience. Sen. Jennie Forehand (D-Montgomery) asked Sheridan, "Do you have any legislators on your list?" The answer was no.

Blogging about rights can get you arrested.

From Tech Cruch:

I found this arresting chart on Swivel. It plots the number of bloggers who have been incarcerated over the past few years, based on data collected by the World Information Access project. The number of incidents it tracks went from five arrests in 2003 to 35 last year. As blogging expands internationally, so do the risk of speaking one’s mind. (Something many of us take for granted).

Most of those arrests are in countries with oppressive regimes, such as Egypt, China, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. But bloggers have been arrested in Canada, France, Greece, and even the U.S. (with Josh Wolf being one of the most famous incidents—he spent the better part of a year in jail for refusing to turn over journalistic video footage to a grand jury).

A few involve cases of alleged terrorism or pedophilia, but the majority involve some form of political speech. Some typical examples:

Reza Valizadeh (Iran; November, 2007). “For revealing Iranian president’s overpriced dogs that his security team uses.”

Charles Leblanc (Canada; June, 2006): “For taking pictures at a conference for his blog.”

Josh Wolf (USA; August, 2006): “For videotaping a burning police car.”

Hu Jia (China; December, 2007): “For posting his vocal critiques of human rights abuses and environmental degradation in China and calling the Olympics a ‘human rights disaster.’”

Reza Valizadeh (Iran; November, 2007): “For revealing Iranian president’s overpriced dogs that his security team uses.”

Nay Phone Latt (Burma; January, 2008): “For posting pictures of monks and people demonstrating on the streets.”

I’ve uploaded a spreadsheet with the names of all 64 arrested bloggers tracked by the WIA that includes their country, date of arrest, and reason for arrest. These do not include people arrested for impersonating someone else on Facebook or unfortunate enough to be beaten to death during an arrest.

(NOTE: Remember after the passage of HB 137 in Florida a blogger that goes by the name of Bullfrog joked, "This means I am now going to have to kill and eat Lopez-Cantera" and immediately came under police investigation.)

Note the comment "but the majority involve some form of political speech." Then keep in mind the MSNBC story about internet monitoring.

Liberty has never come from government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance. -- Woodrow Wilson

Who among us would resist?Add to Technorati Favorites

Fl SB1992 heard in house today with HB137, hey! but who cares?

1992 passed the senate was handed down to the house and heard on the floor today. As of a few minutes ago it had been temporarily postponed while some amendment kinks are worked out. I believe it has been read twice. If it is read again and voted on it passes (that could happen today or tomorrow. It passed the senate with only two nays. I had to call to get this info as none of it has been posted on the senate site, other than the vote count. So God only knows what the final version will be as they are still playing with it on the floor of the house. Which means we can not speak to it.

Since SB 1992 is on the floor HB1111 is probably history. I say prob. because this shit is kinked.

HB137 is also on the floor of the house and we can not speak to it. If it is not read tomorrow it dies. IF it is read it will prob. pass.

SB802 is still in the senate getting some kinks worked out to bring it line with HB137. But it also has gone beyond the point to where we can speak to it.

This really doesn't matter however as 802 was rolled into 1992. So if 1992 passes it passes.

Which caused me to ask some questions that ended up with some yes buts and I don't knows From the Sec of the Senate that suggests I talk to someone who isn't there but she is pretty sure she is right but don't quote her yada yada yada

If I understand it correctly Senate rules prohibit two bills that say the same thing to be on the floor at the same time.
If that is true I wondered how 802 could stand alone and also be in 1992 as the duplicate each other? Her answer is that because one was a stand alone bill and the other was an amendment. That folk would sometimes attach there bills to two or three other bills as amendments to insure their passage. When I asked if she could direct me to where it might find language allowing such language her response was she didn't have the rule book in front of here but she was pretty sure it was ok. And she may well be as apparently there are rules that allow for the suspension of rules and nobody knows them all and on and on and on.................

You still have time to call your senator for whatever it is worth re 802 and your rep for 1992. But do it now.

Now mind you all. Keep this in mind fer sure. All this bullshit started last year when we were raising hell and nobody listened. Nobody cared and some lied their freaking asses off.Add to Technorati Favorites