How America’s Constitutional Government Came To An End

The few people who benefit from the U.S. Government’s being the world’s most powerful are U.S.-and-allied billionaires, who profit from the enormous sales of U.S.-made war-weapons and from the international extraction corporations such as Exxon-Mobil which rely upon its military, but all of this comes at the expense of the publics in every country including that of America itself. Any empire serves only its aristocracy, at the expense of the public. In modern times, the publics need to be deceived by the media and by the billionaires’ other agencies, so as to become deceived to vote for the billionaires’ candidates. This requires massive censorship, notwithstanding that America’s Constitution bans such censorship.

Freedom of the press, and freedom of expression, are ‘guaranteed’ in the U.S. Constitution, but if the controlling owners of the press are a small group of people who benefit from the fact that the wealthiest 1% of the wealthiest 1% of Americans — the wealthiest ten-thousandth of Americans — donate 57.16% of all the money that funds U.S. political campaigns, and that the “Top 400 Donors” (all of whom are multi-billionaires, not merely billionaires) donate 29.86%, or virtually 30%, of all political money, in the U.S., then how likely will the ‘news’-media be to accept for publication or to broadcast news reports that threaten this status-quo from which all of them have made and keep their enormous wealth? Not only do those billionaires own or control virtually all of the ‘news’-media, but the other corporations that they also own or control advertise in them; and, so, they select to hire editors and producers who will reject job-applicants who would report the types of things that those controllers want the public not to know — things such as these. The most-important realities are thus effectively censored-out.

For an example of the most-important realities, here is an entirely truthful 10-minute-long entirely independently produced compendium video that shows the key evidences that the overthrow of Ukraine’s Government in February 2014 was definitely not the democratic revolution that all of the U.S.-and-allied press pretend it was, but was instead a U.S. coup. And here is the complete showing of the smoking-gun piece of evidence in it, so that one can now see this crucial item of evidence within its broader context, and understand how it fits into that context, to produce crucial history instead of the ‘news’-media-promulgated myth that strings together lie-upon-lie. It’s documentation of how the war inside Ukraine (and to which U.S. taxpayers donated over a hundred billion dollars last year) actually started — via this U.S. coup. And here is an even broader contextual documentation of how that U.S. coup started this war, which U.S.-and-allied Governments and their ‘news’-media blame against Russia — as-if it were the case that Russia had expanded up to NATO’s border, instead of NATO’s having expanded up to Russia’s border.

Keep reading

Law Profs Tout Qualified Immunity for Unconstitutional Gun Restrictions

Some ideas are so terrible that combining them into a cocktail of awfulness makes rotten sense. So it is with gun control and qualified immunity: Why not mix impunity for violating basic rights with denial of a specific right so as to maximize the harm? At least, that’s the inspiration that struck two law professors who propose qualified immunity for enforcing even overtly unconstitutional gun control measures. While the duo sees the idea as much as a means of weakening officials’ protections from liability as for promoting restrictions on private arms, it’s a dangerous innovation that could entrench authoritarianism.

“Gun regulation seems to have hit a legal brick wall,” complain Guha Krishnamurthi, associate professor at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, and Peter Salib, assistant professor at the University of Houston Law Center in Notre Dame Law Review Reflection. “In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, the Supreme Court threw out what had been the standard approach for applying the Second Amendment to gun laws.”

Krishnamurthi and Salib argue that Bruen impedes “regulatory innovation” and leaves lawmakers “shackled to the regulations of the distant past.” That’s an interesting way of regretting that government is bound to respect constitutional protections for individual rights. But the two legal thinkers have a fresh regulatory innovation to propose for bypassing such protections—or, at least, a fresh way of applying a controversial legal doctrine to achieve their desired ends.

Keep reading

Ohio officer accused of having sex with minor

The FOX 8 I-Team has learned a Chester Township police officer has been charged with having sex with a 16-year-old girl while on duty.

Chardon Municipal Court records show Nicholas Iacampo, 29, was arrested Sunday a few hours after the alleged incident took place. According to a complaint filed with the court, Iacampo admitted to the offense while speaking with detectives.

Iacampo now faces a felony count of sexual battery. He appeared in court Monday. He was arraigned by a visiting judge and bond was set at $50,000. He was released on bond Monday afternoon.

His attorney, Ian Friedman, told the I-Team that the case is just beginning.

“We will assess the situation as the information comes in and will prepare the appropriate defense,” Friedman said.

Iacampo filled in as a school resource officer from January until June, according to Chester Township Police Chief Craig Young.

Iacampo was immediately placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation, Young said in a statement Monday evening.

Young said his department sought help from the Lake County Sheriff’s Office for a third-party investigation.

“The Lake County Sheriff’s Office investigation is ongoing and will continue until it reaches a conclusion,” Young is quoted in the statement, later adding, “Additional information will be released as the investigation continues.”

Keep reading

From Covert To Overt: UK Govt & Businesses Unleash Facial Recognition Technologies Across Urban Landscape

The Home Office is encouraging police forces across the country to make use of live facial recognition technologies for routine law enforcement. Retailers are also embracing the technology to monitor their customers. 

It increasingly seems that the UK decoupled from the European Union, its rules and regulations, only for its government to take the country in a progressively more authoritarian direction. This is, of course, a generalised trend among ostensibly “liberal democracies” just about everywhere, including EU Member States, as they increasingly adopt the trappings and tactics of more authoritarian regimes, such as restricting free speech, cancelling people and weakening the rule of law. But the UK is most definitely at the leading edge of this trend. A case in point is the Home Office’s naked enthusiasm for biometric surveillance and control technologies.

This week, for example, The Guardian revealed that the Minister for Policing Chris Philip and other senior figures of the Home Office had held a closed-door meeting with Simon Gordon, the founder of Facewatch, a leading facial recognition retail security company, in March. The main outcome of the meeting was that the government would lobby the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) on the benefits of using live facial recognition (LFR) technologies in retail settings. LFR involves hooking up facial recognition cameras to databases containing photos of people. Images from the cameras can then be screened against those photos to see if they match.

The lobbying effort was apparently successful. Just weeks after reaching out to the ICO, the ICO sent a letter to Facewatch affirming that the company “has a legitimate purpose for using people’s information for the detection and prevention of crime” and that its services broadly comply with UK Data Protection laws, which the Sunak government and UK intelligence agencies are trying to gut. As the Guardian report notes, “the UK’s data protection and information bill proposes to abolish the role of the government-appointed surveillance camera commissioner along with the requirement for a surveillance camera code of practice.”

The ICO’s approval gives legal cover to a practice that is already well established. Facewatch has been scanning the faces of British shoppers in thousands of retail stores across the UK for years. The cameras scan faces as people enter a store and screens them against a database of known offenders, alerting shop assistants if a “subject of interest” has entered. Shops using the technologies have placed notices in their windows (such as the one below) informing customers that facial recognition technologies are in operation, “to protect” the shop’s “employees, customers and stock.” But it is far from clear how many shoppers actually take notice of the notices.

Keep reading

Disinformation And Censorship, 1984–2023

Orwell, again. 1984 seems written for the Biden era. Underlying it all is the concept of disinformation, the root of propaganda and mind control. So it is in 2023. Just ask FBI Director Chris Wray. Or Facebook.

George Orwell’s novel explores the concept of disinformation and its role in controlling and manipulating society. Orwell presents a dystopian future where a totalitarian regime, led by the Party and its figurehead Big Brother, exerts complete control over its citizens’ lives, including their thinking. The Party employs a variety of techniques to disseminate disinformation and maintain its power. One of the most prominent examples is the concept of “Newspeak,” a language designed to restrict and manipulate thought by reducing the range of expressible ideas. Newspeak aims to replace words and concepts that could challenge or criticize the Party’s ideology, effectively controlling the way people think and communicate (in our own time and place, think of “unhoused,” “misspoke,” LGBTQIAXYZ+, “nationalist,” “terrorist”).

Orwell also introduces the concept of doublethink, which refers to the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs simultaneously and to accept them both as true. This psychological manipulation technique allows the Party to control the minds of its citizens and make them believe in false information or embrace contradictory ideas without questioning (think mandating masks that do not prevent disease transmission). The Party in 1984 alters historical records and disseminates false information through the Ministry of Truth. This manipulation of historical events and facts aims to control the collective memory of the society in a post-truth era, ensuring that the Party’s version of reality remains unquestioned (think war in Ukraine, Iraq, El Salvador, Vietnam, all to protect our freedom at home.)

Through these portrayals, Orwell highlights the dangers of disinformation and its potential to distort truth, manipulate public opinion, and maintain oppressive systems of power. The novel serves as a warning about the importance of critical thinking, independent thought, and the preservation of objective truth in the face of disinformation and propaganda.

Disinformation is bad. But replacing disinformation with censorship or replacement with other disinformation is worse. 

1984 closed down the marketplace of ideas. So for 2023.

Keep reading

SMOKING WEED MAKES YOU NICER AND LESS GREEDY, SCIENTIST SAYS

Good news, stoners! Science is finally backing up what you’ve long known: that smoking weed does, in fact, make you nicer — and less greedy, to boot.

In a recent study published in the journal Scientific Reports, University of New Mexico researchers found evidence that cannabis use makes people more empathetic, as well as less motivated by money.

Though the study focused on the “prosociality” of cannabis use — that is, as the Scientific Reports paper defines it, “the intentional act of advancing the well-being of other people” — lead author Jacob Vigil said that he’s interested in reframing how other researchers approach studying weed as well.

“They see cannabis users as unmotivated, or they see them as addicted, or perhaps believe that they are losing sight of their goals,” he told Albuquerque-based nonprofit news site The Paper. “It’s never really been approached objectively to see what’s going on before making negative interpretations.”

Basically, Vigil told the site, his team gave college students a “battery of psychological tests” — and also tested their urine for THC, the most psychoactive ingredient in cannabis.

The results?

“We found that folks that had recently used cannabis showed higher levels of pro-social behaviors, and higher measurements of empathy — the empathy quotient was statistically significant across two groups — as well as what researchers refer to as ‘moral foundations,'” he told The Paper. “These are basically the types of ideals that we think about when we justify what is right and what is wrong.”

Keep reading

FBI Made ‘Inappropriate Use’ of Foreign Surveillance Program To Spy on Americans

A White House advisory board has recommended that Congress place new restrictions on the FBI’s access to a foreign surveillance tool to prevent the bureau from using it to spy on Americans’ electronic communications.

That surveillance program—authorized by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—was intended to track foreign spies and potential terrorists but has predictably morphed into a way for law enforcement agencies to get a warrantless peek at Americans’ phone records, emails, and other electronic communications. In the report published Monday, the White House’s Intelligence Advisory Board said the FBI’s use of the databases created by Section 702 should be limited to investigations dealing with foreign intelligence—the same standard that is used at the other intelligence agencies with access to that data.

“FBI’s use of Section 702 should be limited to foreign intelligence purposes only and FBI personnel should receive additional training on what foreign intelligence entails,” the report recommends. The report says the FBI has made “inappropriate use of Section 702 authorities, specifically U.S. person queries.”

While the full scope of Section 702 data collection remains unknown, there’s no doubt about the FBI’s aggressive use of the database. In 2021, for example, the FBI ran more than 3.3 million queries through the Section 702 database, according to a government transparency report. Separately, a 2021 report from the secret federal court responsible for adjudicating FISA-related matters documented 40 instances in which the FBI accessed surveillance data as part of investigations into a host of purely domestic crimes, including health care fraud and public corruption.

The FBI imposed new internal restrictions on the use of Section 702 surveillance last year, but the new White House report says those changes are “insufficient to ensure compliance and earn the public’s trust.”

Indeed, the public (and Congress) ought to be wary of the FBI’s promises to police itself—and of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC) ability to hold the bureau accountable. As Reason‘s Scott Shackford detailed in 2021, the FBI had promised the FISC in the wake of the Carter Page scandal that it would change procedures to stop snooping on Americans. The FISA court rubber-stamped those changes.

Keep reading

New Zealand Keeps Doxxing Registered Gun Owners

A data breach in New Zealand exposed the personal information of some of the country’s gun owners, and not for the first time. It’s another indication of how even well-intended government policies can become civil liberties nightmares.

After the 2019 mass shooting at a Christchurch mosque, the country enacted a series of reforms intended to prevent such tragedies in the future. Along with a ban on most semi-automatic firearms and a gun buyback that netted more than 50,000 weapons, one provision empowered New Zealand’s Firearms Safety Authority to “effectively regulate the legitimate possession and use of firearms.” In other words: a national “firearms registry” that will “link firearms to licence holders, so there is a clear picture of the legally held firearms in New Zealand and improved ability to trace firearms,” according to Executive Director Angela Brazier.

Last week, a joint email went out from the Firearms Safety Authority and the Auckland Central Police District to 147 registered gun owners, advising them that their addresses might need to be updated. Unfortunately, the emails were all listed in the CC field instead of the BCC field, which would be hidden. As a result, each recipient of the email not only saw every single other recipient’s email address but, in many cases, first and last names as well.

As The New Zealand Herald noted, “The visible addresses included various prominent Auckland residents, including lawyers, company directors, police officers and government officials.”

This is not the only, or even the most severe, breach of New Zealand gun owners’ data in recent memory. During the 2019 gun buyback, the government set up a website for gun owners to register their weapons for relinquishment. Police later admitted that visitors to the site could easily access other registrants’ personal information, including names, addresses, dates of birth, and bank account information. And in 2022, thieves stole as many as 400 gun owners’ records from an abandoned police precinct after police officials neglected to destroy the files before moving operations to a new building.

In the U.S., national gun owner registries are prohibited by federal law, though they do exist in some form in certain states, and some progressive lawmakers and advocates support wider adoption. Giffords, the gun control advocacy organization named for former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D–Ariz.) who was shot and nearly killed while in office, says registries are “a useful method of curbing illegal gun activity and encouraging responsible gun practices.” Sen. Cory Booker (D–N.J.) proposed a national licensing system for gun owners in 2019 as part of his presidential campaign platform.

Gun owners would have reason to fear that a registry today could be used to confiscate guns tomorrow. Not to mention, a plan like Booker’s would require the federal government to keep accurate and copious records so as not to accidentally arrest the wrong person—not exactly its strong suit. There’s also the issue of noncompliance: In New Zealand, it’s estimated that somewhere between one-third and one-half of all newly forbidden weapons were actually turned in. In neighboring Australia, often touted as an example of gun control done well, only about one-fifth of banned weapons are estimated to have been turned in.

Keep reading

Fired Southlake cop smiled for swastika photo accidentally texted to citizen, records say

One of two Southlake police officers fired last month texted a photo of the other smiling after he drew a swastika and lightning bolts, which typically represent Hitler’s paramilitary forces, according to documents obtained Wednesday by The Dallas Morning News.

The chief terminated Sgt. Jonathan Macheca and Capt. James Preston Logan last month after an investigation into the drawing, according to the documents. The records allege Macheca made the illustration on a whiteboard during a break from hiring prospective officers at a training center. Logan is accused of snapping the photo and sending it to other officers and accidentally including a member of the public, the documents say.

The documents do not include any images of the drawing. The lightning bolts are still used as a sign of white supremacy. It was unclear whether the officers had attorneys. They could not be reached for comment Wednesday evening.

Keep reading

Georgia fired a state trooper for his conduct. Now he leads Seward County’s Homeland Security task force.

The Seward County Homeland Security task force, sometimes using the controversial practice of civil asset forfeiture, seized $11.8 million from Interstate 80 drivers through civil and criminal forfeiture in its first 32 months.

The Seward-based head of that law enforcement task force trains and supervises officers – despite being barred from becoming a Nebraska police officer himself.

Blake Swicord was fired as a state trooper in Georgia after selling guns to a pardoned felon and allegedly sending sexually explicit texts and photos from his police-issued phone. Swicord, who claims he was wrongfully terminated, then was arrested on suspicion of battery following an alleged domestic violence incident with his then-girlfriend.

The Nebraska agency in charge of law enforcement training has twice denied Swicord admission, saying he didn’t meet the good character requirement for entry. That agency said Swicord failed to disclose his arrest or his firing on his application, as first reported by the Lincoln Journal Star. On Friday, the Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed his latest appeal.

Homeland Security officials told the Flatwater Free Press this week that they had no knowledge of Swicord’s previous dismissal or arrest when he was first placed into a Homeland Security role in 2019. They said they learned of Swicord’s troubles in April 2021, when an assistant U.S. attorney told the agency that the Nebraska Supreme Court had denied Swicord’s first appeal in his quest for police certification.

Swicord will remain in his job as task force coordinator as he continues his legal battle, Seward County Sheriff Mike Vance told a reporter during Tuesday’s Seward County Board meeting.

Vance has previously said he would have to let Swicord go if he can’t become a Nebraska police officer. Vance and dozens of Swicord’s colleagues have praised the 27-year police veteran for his leadership, interdiction skills and professionalism.

“Since his employment with my agency, Mr. Swicord has shown nothing but the upmost integrity and professionalism,” Vance wrote supporting Swicord in 2019. “After conducting this extensive background check I feel very sure that Mr. Swicord is a man of integrity and very honest at all times.”

The Police Standards Advisory Council, which oversees law enforcement certification in Nebraska, has acknowledged Swicord’s qualifications. It also ruled twice that he can’t go through training to become a Nebraska police officer.

“His actions in the application process demonstrate to this body that the petitioner cannot be considered to be a person who can be characterized as being truthful, honest or trustworthy,” the council wrote in its 2019 decision.

Keep reading