Friday, February 10, 2012


The State Has Declared War On The American People
U.S. citizens are now the primary target of the war on terror
Paul Joseph Watson
Friday, February 10, 2012
With the announcement that 30,000 drones are expected to fill American
skies within ten years, the U.S. government has officially declared
war on the American people, turning to technology normally used to
hunt down insurgents abroad as the whole arsenal of the war on terror
is re-focused domestically.
"The Federation Aviation Administration said up to 30,000 drones could
be in airspace shared with airliners carrying passengers," reports
Once signed by president Obama, the FAA Reauthorization Act allows for
the FAA to permit the use of drones and develop regulations for
testing and licensing by 2015.
Some types of surveillance drones are already being used by police
departments across the country, including in Montgomery County, Texas,
where the Department of Homeland Security recently gave the go-ahead
for law enforcement in the United States to deploy the ShadowHawk mini
drone drone helicopter that has the ability to taze suspects from
above as well as carrying 12-gauge shotguns and grenade launchers.
US law enforcement bodies are already using drone technology to spy on
Americans. In December, a Predator B drone was called in to conduct
surveillance over a family farm in North Dakota as part of a SWAT raid
on the Brossart family, who were suspects in the egregious crime of
stealing six missing cows. Local police in this one area have already
used the drone on two dozen occasions since June last year.
The DHS also recently announced a plan to spend up to $50 million
dollars on a spy system that has been used to hunt insurgents in Iraq
and Afghanistan for the purposes of "emergency and non-emergency
incidents" within the United States.
While preparing the use of surveillance drones against Americans, the
U.S. government is also keen to characterize a myriad of behaviors and
activities, no matter how normal or mundane, as potential indicators
of terrorism, encouraging citizens to spy on each other in a chilling
throwback to how people were hired as informants under the East German
As part of its Communities Against Terrorism program, the FBI is
encouraging business owners from across the spectrum to spy on their

Lists of examples of "suspicious behavior" being sent out to
everything from Internet Cafes to tattoo parlors define things like
paying for a cup of coffee with cash, buying food in bulk, and showing
an interest in online privacy as evidence of potential terrorist
The DHS has also released numerous PSAs that depict routine activities
as potential signs of terrorism, including using a video camera,
talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on
a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.
The federal agency attracted much derision last week when it announced
that Super Bowl vendors, including hot dog sellers, had been trained
to spot terrorists under the First Observer program.
Even more chilling, the feds have also begun to characterize perfectly
legitimate political and economic beliefs as those held by terrorists,
effectively denouncing them as thought crimes.
As Reuters reported on Monday, authorities are now treating those who
"believe the United States went bankrupt by going off the gold
standard" as extremists who are a potential violent threat to law
enforcement. The DHS has also previously characterized returning
veterans, Ron Paul supporters, gold investors, and people who display
political bumper stickers as potential domestic terrorists.
All this serves to underscore the fact that the American people have
now been targeted as the number one terror threat in the eyes of the
authorities. The state has declared war on U.S. citizens. Not only
will they be subject to surveillance and intimidation campaigns, but
with the recent passage of the indefinite detention provision of the
NDAA, the government has afforded itself the power to hold Americans
without trial.

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see

* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Why Facebook Works, and Democracy Does Not

Why Facebook Works, and Democracy Does Not
Jeffrey Tucker · February 10, 2012

This year, Facebook will reach 1 billion users ­ or one-seventh of the human population. It has elicited more participation than any single government in the world other than India and China, and it will probably surpass them in a year or two. And whereas many people are fleeing their governments as they are able, more and more people are joining Facebook voluntarily.

What is the logic, the driving force, the agent of change?

Yes, the software works fine, and yes, the managers and owners have entrepreneurial minds. But the real secret to Facebook is its internal human gears ­ the individual users ­ which turn out to mirror the way society itself forms and develops.

The best way to see and understand this is to compare the workings of Facebook with the workings of the democratic political process. Watching Facebook's development has been fun, productive, fascinating, useful and progressive. The election season, in contrast, has been divisive, burdensome, wasteful, acrimonious and wholly confusing.

That's because Facebook and democracy work on entirely different principles.

Facebook is based on the principle of free association. You join or decline to join. You can have one friend or thousands. It is up to you. You share the information you want to share and keep other things from public view. You use the platform only to your advantage while declining to use it for some other purpose.

The contribution you make on Facebook extends from the things you know best: yourself, your interests, your activities, your ideas. The principle of individualism ­ you are the best manager of your life ­ is the gear that moves the machine. Just as no two people are alike, no two people have the same experience with the platform. All things are customized according to your interests and desires.

But of course, you are interested in others too, so you ask for a connection. If they agree, you link up and form something mutually satisfying. You choose to include and exclude, gradually forming your own unique community based on any selection criteria you want. The networks grow and grow from these principles of individualism and choice. It is a constantly evolving, cooperative process ­ exactly the one that Hans-Hermann Hoppe describes as the basis of society itself.

Democratic elections seem to be about choice in some way, but it is a choice over who will rule the whole mob. It provides the same user experience for everyone, regardless of individual desire. You are forced into the system by virtue of having been born into it. Sure, you can choose to vote, but you can't choose whether to be ruled by the voting results.

In this democratic system, you are automatically given 220 million "friends" whether you like it or not. These fake "friends" are given to you because of a geographic boundary drawn by government leaders long ago. These "friends" are posting on your wall constantly. Your news feed is relentless series of demands. You cannot delete their posts or mark them as spam. Revenue is not extracted from advertising but collected as you use the system.

Nothing is truly voluntary in an election. You are bound by the results regardless. This creates absurdities. This is incredibly apparent in the Republican nominating process. If people under 30 prevailed, Ron Paul would win. If religious families with several kids prevailed, Rick Santorum would win. If the Chamber of Commerce members prevailed, Mitt Romney would be victor. It all comes down to demographics but there can be only one winner under this system.

Therefore, an election must be a struggle between people, a fight, a wrangling around, a push to assert your will and overcome the interests and desires of others. In the end, we are assured that no matter the outcome, we should be happy because we all participated. The individual must give way to the collective.

We are told that this means that the system worked. But in what sense does it work? It only means that the well-organized minority prevailed over the diffused majority. This is about as peaceful as the kid's game "king of the mountain."

Facebook has nothing to do with this nonsense. Your communities are your own creation, an extension of your will and its harmony with the will of others. The communities grow based on the principle of mutual advantage. If you make a mistake, you can undisplay your friend's posts or you can unfriend him. This hurts feelings, sure, but it is not violent: It doesn't loot or kill.

Your friends in Facebook can be from anywhere. They "check in" and plot their journeys. Whether your friend lives in or moves to Beijing or Buenos Aires doesn't matter. Facebook makes possible what we might call geographically noncontiguous human associations. Language differences can be barriers to communication, but even they can be overcome.

Democracy is hyperbound by geography. You vote in an assigned spot. Your vote is assembled together with those of others in your county to produce a single result, and therefore, your actual wishes are instantly merged. They are merged again at another geographic level, and then at the state level and, finally, at the national level. By that time, your own preferences are vaporized.

Sometimes people get sick of Facebook. They suddenly find it tedious, childish, time wasting, even invasive. Fine. You can bail out. Go to your system preferences and turn off all notifications and take a sabbatical. People might complain, but it is your choice to be there or not. You can even delete your account entirely with no real downside. Then you can sign up again later if you so desire or join some other system of social networking.

Try doing that to democracy. You can't unsubscribe. You are automatically in for life, and not even changing your location or moving out of the country changes that. It is even extremely hard to delete your account by renouncing your citizenship. The leaders of the democracy will still hound you.

We can learn from Facebook and all other social networks that the Internet has brought us. These are more than websites; they are models of social organization that transcend old forms. Make the rest of life more like a social network and we will begin to see real progress in the course of civilization. Persist in the old model of forced democratic community and we will continue to see decline.

Al Qaeda supporting Bahrain Gov

Have you seen this Mr. Obama? Or you still support the dictator regime in Bahrain.


Bahrain government supporters raising AL Qaeda flag in there demonstration.


__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 6386 (20110817) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

Ellen Stands Up to Right-Wing Gay Bashing Group "One Million Moms"

Ellen Stands Up to Right-Wing Gay Bashing Group "One Million Moms"
"One Million Moms" is angry JC Penny is sticking by Ellen, their
spokesperson. Ellen had some choice words for them in return.

The conservative Christian group One Million Moms is angry. Angry like
just-missed-an-awesome-sale angry. Sure, the down-home-sounding
offshoot of the reliably right-wing American Family Association exists
in a perpetual state of twisted knickers. It's whipped itself into a
frenzy of indignation at the not-quite-exclusionary-enough tactics of
Macy's, Levi's, Jenny Craig and Oreos in just the past few months. But
its outrage at JC Penney, the jeans supplier to at least 800,000 of
those million moms, is especially intense of late.

At issue is the group's contention that by hiring Ellen DeGeneres for
a new campaign, the department store is "jumping on the pro-gay
bandwagon" and turning away from "traditional families." The
organization warns darkly that "Unless JC Penney decides to be neutral
in the culture war then their brand transformation will be
unsuccessful." There is so much to love in that sentence alone.
Culture war! Brand transformation! Fearless disregard for the rules of
comma usage after a subordinate clause! "The majority of JC Penney
shoppers will be offended," they continue, "and choose to no longer
shop there."

JC Penney, however, which recently declared that "We share the same
fundamental values as Ellen," has remained unmoved from its perch on
a "pro-gay bandwagon" in the midst of a "culture war." (I hope that
bandwagon is reinforced.) Also unmoved: the woman at the center of the

On her daytime talk show Wednesday, DeGeneres cheerfully opened by
talking about Proposition 8 being overturned in California, then
segued into a riff about her partnership with Penney's. "Normally I
try not to pay attention to my haters," she said, "but this time I'd
like to talk about it."

After announcing she was "proud and happy" that JC Penney was sticking
by her side, she explained to America that "Being gay or pro-gay is
not a bandwagon. You don't get a free ride anywhere. There's no music,
and occasionally we'll sing, 'We Are Family,' but that's about it."
And she noted that "For a group that calls itself the Million Moms,
they have only 40,000 members on their [Facebook] page. They're
rounding to the nearest million." It was a witty retort to a campaign
of hate, though frankly, not nearly as hilarious as the Million Moms'
depiction of DeGeneres as an "open homosexual spokesperson."

On her show, DeGeneres read some of the hundreds of supportive
messages that have been posted on the Million Moms' own Facebook page
since their campaign against her launched. DeGeneres has also received
public support from, of all people, Bill O'Reilly, who said on his
program Tuesday that the protest was "a witch hunt and shouldn't
happen." When you're too loathsome for Bill O'Reilly, you've really
outdone yourself, loathsomeness-wise.

One Million Moms describes itself as an organization for people who
are "fed up" and "tired," one that devotes itself, seemingly
exclusively, to complaining "on behalf of our children." On her
program Wednesday, DeGeneres said, "I stand for honesty, equality,
kindness, compassion, treating people the way you want to be treated,
and helping those in need. To me, those are traditional values." Even
the most die-hard shopper knows that values aren't just reasonably
priced furnishings from the Cindy Crawford collection. They're how you
live. And if you're going to be on a bandwagon, who wouldn't choose
the one without all those angry people on it?

Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,

Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see

* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Openly Gay New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn Previews Bid for Mayor in Address

Council Speaker Previews Bid for Mayor in Address

Brian Harkin for The New York Times
Speaker Christine C. Quinn of the City Council gave her State of the
City speech on Thursday.

Christine C. Quinn, simultaneously offering an agenda for the City
Council and a preview of her mayoral campaign, proposed on Thursday to
crack down on landlords whose buildings are deteriorating, to make
kindergarten mandatory and to provide more job training for unemployed
New Yorkers.

Ms. Quinn, the Council speaker, touched in her annual State of the
City speech on many of the basic issues important to middle-class and
poor New Yorkers: education, employment opportunity, housing and
health care. She did not offer a sweeping analysis of the city's
needs, but instead focused on a few specific steps that might improve
conditions for those struggling to make ends meet.

At the beginning and end of her speech, Ms. Quinn invoked an image of
a city rooted in a halcyon, democratic past, exemplified by the Upper
East Side immigrant neighborhood where her father, Lawrence Quinn —
who introduced her on Thursday, as he often does — grew up during the
Depression, with laundry hanging out the windows and the "smell of
cabbage cooking down the hall."

"People who have never visited New York often see it as an
intimidating metropolis, cold and impersonal," she said. "But New
Yorkers know the truth. We are not a big city. We're a patchwork of
small towns."

Ms. Quinn, a Democrat who began as a housing activist but has moved to
the political center over the course of her career, described New
York's communities as facing "challenges," including chronic
unemployment and high-cost housing and health care.

To combat unemployment, she said the Council would start a pilot
jobs-training program and would use $10 million in federal tax credits
to finance loans to small businesses. And, she said, she will ask the
Council to pass legislation making it illegal to discriminate in
hiring because an applicant is unemployed.

Seeking to assist the large number of independent contractors and
self-employed people in the city, she said the Council would help the
Freelancers Union establish a clinic to provide low-cost health care
to its members. She also praised the New York Hotel and Motel Trades
Council and its powerful president, Peter Ward, for the free health
care clinics that it has for its members.

Ms. Quinn pledged to work toward a goal of "permanent affordability"
in development deals, noting that most affordable housing guarantees
by developers expire after 30 years.

Recalling the frustration that she said she felt as a housing
advocate, "watching landlords let a building deteriorate so that they
could push out tenants and sell," Ms. Quinn pledged that the Council
would pass a measure allowing the Department of Housing Preservation
and Development to require landlords to fix underlying conditions,
rather than simply make cosmetic fixes.

"Slumlords will have to spend real money and fix the real problem, or
we'll haul them into housing court," she said.

And, acknowledging that the city had not been a model landlord itself,
she pledged to increase the budget of the New York City Housing
Authority — by $10 million, according to a news release — to allow it
to hire residents to do repairs.

She vowed to work with the state to pass a bill allowing New York City
to make kindergarten mandatory because, she said, each year several
thousand 5-year-olds do not enroll in school. And she urged the State
Legislature to pass the Dream Act, which would allow tuition
assistance to illegal immigrants. That measure has also been endorsed
by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg.

In a reflection of the degree to which crime has ebbed as an issue in
much of the city, Ms. Quinn spoke only briefly about public safety,
pledging to create a program to work with residents to clean up
high-crime areas. She praised the police commissioner, Raymond W.
Kelly, and made no reference to the department's controversial
stop-and-frisk practice, which other mayoral candidates have
criticized as discriminatory against blacks and Hispanics. (Ms. Quinn
sent Mr. Kelly a letter this week expressing concerns about the

The speech seemed to please the more liberal members of the Council,
some of whom have occasionally clashed with Ms. Quinn.

Letitia James, a Brooklyn council member from the Working Families
Party, said she was "pleasantly surprised" by the address.

"It was a touchdown," she said. "It hit all the progressive notes."

Ms. Quinn twice praised Mr. Bloomberg, who was not present, for his
advocacy on immigration and gun control issues. She is a close ally of
the mayor and a leading contender in the 2013 race to succeed him.

Three of Ms. Quinn's prospective rivals for the Democratic nomination
for mayor — Bill de Blasio, the public advocate; Scott M. Stringer,
the Manhattan borough president; and John C. Liu, the comptroller —
attended the speech, and all were polite in praising it, focusing on
her education proposals. Another candidate, William C. Thompson Jr.,
the former comptroller and 2009 Democratic mayoral candidate, did not


Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,

Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see

* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Obstructionist Republicans Retreat on Federal Domestic Violence Fight

Even in the ultrapolarized atmosphere of Capitol Hill, it should be
possible to secure broad bipartisan agreement on reauthorizing the
Violence Against Women Act, the 1994 law at the center of the nation's

MORE unconstitutional nonsense ... isn't THIS what hoisted Mr. Bill?


... the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "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," therefore the act of Congress, passed on the 14th day of July, 1798, and intituled "An Act in addition to the act intituled An Act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States," as also the act passed by them on the -- day of June, 1798, intituled "An Act to punish frauds committed on the bank of the United States," (and all their other acts which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution,) are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory. -- Thomas Jefferson, the Kentucky Resolution, 1798

Obstructionist Republicans Retreat on Federal Domestic Violence Fight

Republicans Retreat on Domestic Violence
Published: February 9, 2012

Even in the ultrapolarized atmosphere of Capitol Hill, it should be
possible to secure broad bipartisan agreement on reauthorizing the
Violence Against Women Act, the 1994 law at the center of the nation's
efforts to combat domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking. The
law's renewal has strong backing from law enforcement and groups that
work with victims, and earlier reauthorizations of the law, in 2000
and 2005, passed Congress with strong support from both sides of the

Yet not a single Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee voted in
favor last week when the committee approved a well-crafted
reauthorization bill introduced by its chairman, Senator Patrick
Leahy, and Senator Michael Crapo, a Republican of Idaho, who is not on
the committee.

The bill includes smart improvements aimed, for example, at
encouraging effective enforcement of protective orders and reducing
the national backlog of untested rape kits. The Republican opposition
seems driven largely by an antigay, anti-immigrant agenda. The main
sticking points seemed to be language in the bill to ensure that
victims are not denied services because they are gay or transgender
and a provision that would modestly expand the availability of special
visas for undocumented immigrants who are victims of domestic violence
— a necessary step to encourage those victims to come forward.

Senator Charles Grassley, the committee's ranking Republican, offered
a substitute bill that not only cut out those improvements but called
for a huge reduction in authorized financing, and elimination of the
Justice Department office devoted to administering the law and
coordinating the nation's response to domestic violence and sexual
assaults. His measure was defeated along party lines.

Mustering the 60 votes needed to get the bill through the full Senate
will not be easy, even though previous reauthorizations were approved
by unanimous consent. Recalcitrant Republicans should be made to
explain to voters why they refuse to get behind the federal fight
against domestic violence and sexual assaults.

Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,

Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see

* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Podcast interview re Iran's nuclear program w/ Ambassador Peter Jenkins

Posted this morning at Electric Politics, a podcast interview with
Ambassador Peter Jenkins, who from 2001 to 2006 was Britain's
Permanent Representative to the IAEA in Vienna, capping a thirty three
year career in the British Foreign Service. If anyone currently
outside government understands the technical complications regarding
nonproliferation, and the policy, he does. The Ambassador says that
(1) the Iranians are only doing things that they are perfectly well
allowed to do under the letter of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty
(in other words, if the U.S. and Israel went to war against Iran over
nuclear issues such a war would be far from unambiguously legal); and
(2) that the Iranians offered us a deal back in 2005 that we should
have accepted: in exchange for much more intrusive IAEA safeguards we
would agree that Iran can continue to enrich uranium -- again, under
the letter of the NPT. The Ambassador remembers thinking at the time
that this was a pretty good offer but it wasn't until after he retired
from the British Foreign Service that he changed his mind about Iran,
began exploring the idea's feasibility, and became a proponent. Which
took a great deal of courage. In any case, he is absolutely right. A
compromise within the letter of the NPT is infinitely preferable to
going to war.

This one is important. If you like it, please forward the link.

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see

* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fwd: [LA-F] Why having a name that's easy to pronounce could propel you up the career ladder

Why having a name that's easy to pronounce could propel you up the career ladder

By Richard Hartley-parkinson

Last updated at 12:08 PM on 9th February 2012

Struggling to get up the career ladder? It could be because of your name

If you wonder why you're always being passed over for promotion, then there might finally be a solution... change your name.

People with a name that is more easily pronounced have better prospects of climbing the career ladder, a study as found.

Researchers looked at how the way names are said can influence impressions and decision making.

Dr Simon Laham from the University of Melbourne which carried out the study, said their were subtle biases that we are not aware of that affect our decisions.

'Research findings revealed that the effect is not due merely to the length of a name or how foreign-sounding or unusual it is, but rather how easy it is to pronounce.

'It is important to appreciate the subtle biases that shape our choices and judgments about others. Such an appreciation may help us de-bias our thinking, leading to fairer, more objective treatment of others.'

Dr Adam Alter from the New York University Stern School of Business which also took part in the study said; 'People simply aren't aware of the subtle impact that names can have on their judgments.'

The research, published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, also found that it's not just in the office that people with easy-to-say names do well, it also discovered that it helped in the political world.

Following a mock ballot, candidates with easier names were found to be more likely to win an election race than those without.

In law, attorneys with more pronounceable names rose more quickly to superior positions in their firms based on a study of 500 first and last names of U.S. lawyers.

Researchers conducted studies both in lab settings and in a natural environment using a range of names from Anglo, Asian, and Western and Eastern European backgrounds.

This research builds on Dr Alter's earlier work, which suggests that financial stocks with simpler names tend to outperform similar stocks with complex names immediately after they appear on the market.

Read more:
--  Mario Huet Libertarian Alliance Forum List Administrator  ********************************************** Words cannot picture her; but all men know    That solemn sketch the pure sad artist wrought  ********************************************** James Thomson, The City of Dreadful Night 

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see
* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Thailand:Upcoming trials of human rights defenders Somyot Prueksakasemsuk and Chiranuch Premchaiporn

H.E. Yingluck Shinawatra,
Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand
Office of the Prime Minister

Government House
Thanon Phitsanulok, Dusit
Bangkok 10300



10 February 2012


Re: Thailand – Upcoming trials of human rights defenders Somyot Prueksakasemsuk and Chiranuch Premchaiporn


Your Excellency,

I, the undersigned independent human rights defender and journalist, write to you to reiterate my serious concerns about the ongoing use of the lèse majesté law, particularly against human rights defenders, and its deleterious effect on fundamental freedoms. I deeply regret the continued resistance by members of the Thai government, including high-level members of your Cabinet, political parties, and the military, to enter into a reasoned, broad-based debate of the necessary reforms of the lèse majesté law in order to improve Thailand's observance of its obligations under international human rights law and constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression and fair trial rights, including the right to bail.

Next week, two high-profile lèse majesté trials will resume and Thailand's failure to respect freedom of speech and fair trial standards will again be placed under public scrutiny.


The hearings of the trial of Ms. Chiranuch Premchaiporn, a known advocate for freedoms of expression and the media and Executive Director of the online news website Prachatai, will resume on 14 February and conclude on 16 February. She is facing ten counts of charges of violations of Article 15 of the 2007 Computer Crimes Act and Article 112 of the Criminal Code on lèse majesté for allegedly not removing quickly enough anonymous third-party posts deemed offensive to the monarchy on a public forum on the Prachatai website. Chiranuch faces up to 20 years imprisonment if found guilty.

The trial of Mr. Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, long time labour rights activist and Editor of Voice of the Oppressed (Voice of Taksin), who is facing charges of lèse majesté for the publication of two articles that allegedly made negative references to the monarchy, has been detained since 30 April 2011. Somyot's trial started in November 2011 and continues on 13 February in Songkhla province. He is facing a maximum of 30 years' imprisonment if found guilty. Following the 13 February hearing, the Defence witnesses will be called to appear before the Bangkok Criminal Court on 18-20 April 2012, 24-26 April 2012, and 1-4 May 2012.

I am troubled by the fact that the three previous hearings of Somyot's trial have all been held outside Bangkok, in Sa Kaeo, Petchabun and Nakorn Sawan provinces. Somyot reports that he had to stand up throughout the transfers between trials in an overcrowded truck, with his ankles shackled and without access to rest room facilities. Somyot suffers from hypertension and gout, a painful condition that affects the joints. While in Petchabun province, he was moved to the prison infirmary due to aggravation of his medical conditions.

A number of prosecution witnesses in fact work and live in Bangkok, although their original registered residences are in the provinces. On 12 September 2011, the Criminal Court rejected Somyot's lawyer's request to hold hearings in Bangkok. Three other similar subsequent requests put forward to the Sakaeo, Petchabun and Nakorn Sawan Courts were also denied.

I reiterate my concern that the holding of the trials from province to province places undue physical and psychological burden on Somyot and his family. The transfers also undermine his fair trial rights, including the right to a speedy trial considering there are ten more hearings scheduled up to 4 May, by which time he will have been in detention for over a year. I am  disturbed that Somyot's application for bail has been denied for the 7th time on 6 February. The authorities have still not provided an adequate justification for his continued detention or a legally sound explanation as to why less restrictive and non-custodial measures are not sufficient to prevent flight and non-tampering with evidence. The repetition of the ill-defined concept of "national security" as a ground for rejecting the bail applications of those charged under the lèse majesté laws reinforces the perception that the criminalization of speech, a common practice by authoritarian regimes to silence criticisms, is increasingly becoming a tool of institutionalized oppression in Thailand, including against those documenting human rights violations.


In light of the numerous commitments to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms made by Thailand under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and during the Universal Periodic Review of its human rights record in October 2011, I strongly urge the Thai authorities to:

Immediately grant Somyot Prueksakasemsuk his constitutional right to bail, in accordance with fair trial standards under domestic and international law;


Request the court to refrain from bringing new charges against individuals under the lèse majesté laws pending a comprehensive review of the said laws;

Immediately drop all charges against Chiranuch Premchaiporn, Somyot Prueksakasemsuk and all other human rights defenders based on the lèse majesté laws and, more generally, guarantee in all circumstances that all human rights defenders in Thailand, especially those working on freedoms of expression and the media, are able to carry out their legitimate human rights activities without fear of reprisals and free of all restrictions, including judicial harassment, in line with the UN Declaration on the Rights and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Facilitate the review of the lèse majesté laws by the Law Reform Commission and the National Human Rights Commission's working group on the lèse majesté law with an aim to develop concrete proposals to bring the relevant laws into line with Thailand's international human rights obligations, as recommended by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression;

Encourage and foster a civil, reasoned and public debate regarding the need to amend the lèse majesté laws and cease to portray respect for the universally recognized freedom of expression and opinion as contradictory to the protection of the monarchy;


Honor its voluntary pledge made at the UPR to issue a standing invitation to UN human rights experts by inviting the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression and the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders to visit Thailand at the earliest instance.


Yours Sincerely,

William Nicholas Gomes

William's Desk

Download : Thailand Upcoming trials of human rights defenders Somyot Prueksakasemsuk and Chiranuch Premchaiporn

William Nicholas Gomes
Journalist & Human Rights Activist
80/ B Bramon Chiron, Saydabad,
Dhaka-1203, Bangladesh.
Cell: +88 019 7 444 0 666
William [at],editorbd[at]
Skype: William.gomes9
Face book:
Web site

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see
* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


YouTube Help Center | Change Email Preferences

AdamKokesh just uploaded a video:

You can unsubscribe from notifications for this user by visiting My Subscriptions.

© 2011 YouTube, LLC
901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see
* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

If your child comes home from school and tells you ‘Muslims discovered America,’ here’s why

New post on Bare Naked Islam

If your child comes home from school and tells you 'Muslims discovered America,' here's why

by barenakedislam

Parents, it's up to you to stop the creeping Islamization of American schools if your school officials will not. Start by reading your children's history and social studies books, make notes of where you find blaring inaccuracies and revisionist history, then organize a parent posse and demand that the school board replace these textbooks immediately. If they won't listen, pressure your local and state representatives to help you. And try to get media coverage of the problem.

Patriot Update  Saudi-funded textbooks being used in America's K-12 classrooms.

"Muslims discovered America. Jerusalem is an Arab city.  The Holocaust never happened." This is just some of the 'history' that students in America's K-12 classrooms are being taught in recent years--with the help of taxpayer money. A new report by the non-profit Institute for Jewish and Community Research finds that American high school and elementary textbooks contain countless inaccuracies about Christianity, Judaism, Israel and the Middle East.

The Institute examined 28 of the most widely-used history, geography and social studies textbooks in America. It found at least 500 errors. Teaching, among other things, that Jesus was a "Palestinian," the state of Israel never existed, and that the Muslims discovered America before Columbus. At this rate, perhaps even Saudi grade-school textbooks, complete with jihadi and dhimmi declarations, will come to instruct American school-children.

In a report called "Public Schools Teach the ABCs of Islam," by Erick Stakelbeck for CBN News, several recent studies have shown that American students are alarmingly ignorant about U.S. history and world events.

Experts have attributed the problem to everything from failing schools to substandard teachers. Everything but the fact that students in American schools are just repeating what they are learning in the classroom.



















An Encyclopedic Antidote to Islamic Indoctrination in Public Schools






















barenakedislam | February 10, 2012 at 3:06 am | Categories: Islam in America | URL:

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see
* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Protest the Cancellation of 'Freedom Watch'

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Lew Rockwell <>
Date: Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 8:54 PM
Subject: Protest the Cancellation of 'Freedom Watch'

Protest the Cancellation of 'Freedom Watch'

If you are as outraged as I am at the cancellation of Judge Andrew Napolitano's magnificent "Freedom Watch," here is something you can do.

Please contact Fox Business to ask them to reverse their decision.

Irena Briganti, Senior Vice President
Media Relations
Phone: 212-301-3608
Fax: 212-819-0816

Be respectful be be sure to convey your outrage at this matter, and state that you and many others will boycott the network if the show is taken off the air.


You are currently subscribed to lewsdailypage as:
Add to your email address book to ensure delivery
Forward to a Friend  |  Manage Subscription  |   Subscribe  |   Unsubscribe

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see
* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Agenda 21 + Food Police + Walmart

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Agenda 21 + Food Police + Walmart

by sage_brush

Sustainability and Walmart?  Yup!!!

Penny Starr reporting for CNS News:

( – Shoppers in the grocery aisles of Walmart will soon see a new icon popping up on foods deemed healthier by the retail giant, which will also track how many of those items make it to the checkout counter.

Corporate officials unveiled the "Great for You" icon at an event in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday.

The new signage is part of a wider Walmart campaign, announced last year alongside First Lady Michelle Obama.

Andrea Thomas, the company's vice-president of sustainability, said the company would monitor how shoppers react.

"We will have actual learning now of when you put an icon on a package and when you have criteria such as ours, does that shift behaviors?" Thomas said. "We'll be able to track when the icon goes on a particular product; what happens to sales within that category, what happens to sales across categories."

Thomas said the green-and-white logo featuring a leaping or exercising stick figure will be rolled out in the produce section of Walmart grocery isles in April and will then be added to packaging over the next year.

"We'll be able to see, as soon as those signs roll out, how does the purchase behavior shift because of that information?" Thomas said.

The Walmart campaign announced last July with the First Lady includes the labeling on products and plans to build stores in areas which the Department of Agriculture has determined to be "food deserts."

Here is what someone found in the toy department at Walmart -

The Corps: WORLD Action Force

On the box it reads

"In a time of confusion, a fearful world requires men of honor and courage to step forward: heroes whose mettle has been tested and whose skills have been honed. From around the world they step forward. The best of the best. And take up the mantle of The Corps! An ever-ready team devoted to protecting every person, every country; our world"

[I'm sure these "action figures" are made in "green factories?" in China - snarc]

And here is a special treat - Walmart's  Sustainability 2.0

Conservatives don't want their food monitored, their children indoctrinated, or their behavior "shifted."

The Bible says that the body of a Christian is the Temple of the Holy Spirit.  It is not for a sinister world government joined with  a private/public partnership to determine how you treat that temple - that is between you and the Lord. This has nothing to do with making us healthy - it is about control.  Period.


Wal-Mart Sustainability video states: "In the decades ahead, a dramatic new world will begin to take shape. Powerful forces have already begun to contribute to this transformation."


For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6: 12







Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:

Thanks for flying with

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see
* Visit our other community at
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.