FOX News.com
BRUSSELS (AP) — NATO must win the war in Afghanistan, expand ties with Russia and even China, counter the threat posed by Iran's missiles, and assure the security of its 28 members, according to the alliance's proposed mission statement for the next decade.
The draft document, released Monday, seeks to bridge a growing rift between the U.S., which favors a greater international role for NATO, and European nations that want it to retain its traditional defensive focus.
"NATO must be versatile and efficient enough to operate far from home," said former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, head of the team of experts who wrote the document. "(But) in order to sustain the political will for operations outside its area, NATO must see that all its members are reassured about the security of their home territories."
The document warned governments not to slash defense spending at a time of economic crisis, because of the growing discrepancy in military capabilities between the United States and Europe's NATO members. Most European nations are not even meeting the minimal requirement of devoting 2 percent of their GDP to defense.
Read the entire article
"It is not enough to know that there is a shadow government pulling the strings of the visible government- we must also act to expose it, and defeat it!"-Mark Matheny
Solving the massive debt problem with more debt. American consumers carry as much debt as annual U.S. GDP. Credit card debt declines but auto loans and student loans go up?
MyBudget360.com
Posted: 15 May 2010 10:03 AM PDT
The Federal Reserve has come to the aid of bailing out Greece. I wonder how many Americans even know that billions of U.S. dollars are going to prop up a failing European country in Greece that got into the mess they are in because of too much debt. In the end, the Euro is still crashing down because Greece is merely one country out of many with massive debt problems. Middle class Americans don’t need an extensive lesson in economics to understand this. If you take on too much debt, at a certain point you will end up paying the piper. This doesn’t matter if you spend too much money on clothing by charging up your credit card or buying a home that you clearly couldn’t afford. In the end, a bill comes due. Unlike Wall Street who operates the Washington D.C. purse strings, you are small enough to fail in their eyes. If you purchase a home that is too expensive, you will either have to pay the mortgage or end up in foreclosure. Giant amounts of debt have ruined individuals as well as countries.
Read the entire report
Posted: 15 May 2010 10:03 AM PDT
The Federal Reserve has come to the aid of bailing out Greece. I wonder how many Americans even know that billions of U.S. dollars are going to prop up a failing European country in Greece that got into the mess they are in because of too much debt. In the end, the Euro is still crashing down because Greece is merely one country out of many with massive debt problems. Middle class Americans don’t need an extensive lesson in economics to understand this. If you take on too much debt, at a certain point you will end up paying the piper. This doesn’t matter if you spend too much money on clothing by charging up your credit card or buying a home that you clearly couldn’t afford. In the end, a bill comes due. Unlike Wall Street who operates the Washington D.C. purse strings, you are small enough to fail in their eyes. If you purchase a home that is too expensive, you will either have to pay the mortgage or end up in foreclosure. Giant amounts of debt have ruined individuals as well as countries.
Read the entire report
20 Signs That The United States Is Rapidly Becoming A Totalitarian Big Brother Police State
The End Of The World
March 12, 2010
Once upon a time, the United States was a land of unparalleled freedom. The rest of the world envied the freedom that ordinary Americans had to think, say and do what they wanted. But all of that has changed. Now Americans have to fear that they will be tackled by a squad of security goons and dragged off to a detention facility somewhere if they spill a Pepsi on a flight attendant or take a few too many pictures of a public building. The United States used to be the polar opposite of totalitarian regimes like Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, but now America is rapidly becoming very much like them. Due to the fear of a boogeyman living in a cave somewhere or some guy with explosive powder in his underwear we are all being forced to give up our freedoms and learn to live in a Big Brother police state.
But have things really changed so much that we have to give up all of the cherished freedoms that our fathers and grandfathers fought and died for? Haven’t there always been fanatics and crazies and criminals out there? Why do we suddenly have to become so afraid of them?
In the past, Americans would not let anyone make them live in fear. If some unbalanced individual did something bad, it wasn’t the end of the world, was it? No, in the past Americans dusted themselves off and continued to live as free men and women. You see, when we live in fear and radically alter our way of life just to feel a little more secure, we lose. We have let someone else steal our freedom and our dignity.
But now in the name of “security” all kinds of bizarre proposals have been implemented on the local, state and national levels. Somehow we think that if everything that we do is watched, monitored and analyzed we will all be safer somehow.
Maybe we are safer and maybe we aren’t, but we are certainly a whole lot less free.
The following are 20 signs that the United States is rapidly becoming a totalitarian ”Big Brother” police state….
#1) A new bill being pushed by Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman would allow the U.S. military to round up large numbers of Americans and detain them indefinitely without a trial if they “pose a threat” or if they have “potential intelligence value” or for any other reason the President of the United States “considers appropriate”.
#2) Lawmakers in Washington D.C. working to create a new immigration bill have decided on a way to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants: a national biometric identification card all American workers would be required to obtain.
#3) Barack Obama is backing a plan to create a national database to store the DNA of people who have been arrested but not necessarily convicted of a crime.
#4) Just to get on an airplane, Americans will now have to go through new full-body scanners that reveal every detail of our exposed bodies to airport security officials.
#5) If that wasn’t bad enough, the Transportation Security Administration has announced that airport screeners will begin roving through airports randomly taking chemical swabs from passengers and their bags to check for explosives.
#6) Starting this upcoming December, some passengers on Canadian airlines flying to, from or even over the United States without ever landing there, will only be allowed to board their flights once the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has determined they are not terrorists.
#7) Organic milk is such a threat that the FDA has been conducting military style raids on Amish farmers in Pennsylvania.
#8) An NYPD officer has broken his silence and has confessed that innocent citizens are being set up and falsely arrested and ticketed in order to meet quotas.
#9) A growing number of police departments across the U.S. are turning to mobile camera systems in order to fight motor vehicle theft and identify unregistered cars.
#10) For decades, Arizona has been known as “the sunset state”, but lately many frustrated residents have started calling it “the surveillance state”.
#11) Judges and police in Florida have been caught using “secret codes” on tickets in the state of Florida.
#12) An extensive investigation has revealed that between 2003 and 2007, that state of Texas quietly gave hundreds of newborn baby blood samples to a U.S. Armed Forces laboratory for use in a forensics database.
#13) A 6-year-old girl was recently handcuffed and sent to a mental facility after throwing temper tantrums at her elementary school.
#14) One 12-year-old girl in New York was recently arrested and marched out of her school in handcuffs just because she doodled on her desk.
#15) In Florida, students have been arrested by police for things as simple as bringing a plastic butter knife to school, throwing an eraser, and drawing a picture of a gun.
#16) When a mother on a flight to Denver spanked both of her children and cussed out a flight attendant who tried to intervene, she suddenly found herself handcuffed and headed for prison. Why? She was charged with being a domestic terrorist under the Patriot Act.
#17) A new global treaty may force U.S. Internet service providers to spy on what you do online.
#18) A leaked Obama administration memo has revealed plans for the federal government to seize more than 10 million acres of land from Montana to New Mexico.
#19) 56 percent of Americans questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll said that the U.S. government has become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.
#20) But one other recent poll found that 51 percent of Americans agree with this statement: ”It is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism.”
March 12, 2010
Once upon a time, the United States was a land of unparalleled freedom. The rest of the world envied the freedom that ordinary Americans had to think, say and do what they wanted. But all of that has changed. Now Americans have to fear that they will be tackled by a squad of security goons and dragged off to a detention facility somewhere if they spill a Pepsi on a flight attendant or take a few too many pictures of a public building. The United States used to be the polar opposite of totalitarian regimes like Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, but now America is rapidly becoming very much like them. Due to the fear of a boogeyman living in a cave somewhere or some guy with explosive powder in his underwear we are all being forced to give up our freedoms and learn to live in a Big Brother police state.
But have things really changed so much that we have to give up all of the cherished freedoms that our fathers and grandfathers fought and died for? Haven’t there always been fanatics and crazies and criminals out there? Why do we suddenly have to become so afraid of them?
In the past, Americans would not let anyone make them live in fear. If some unbalanced individual did something bad, it wasn’t the end of the world, was it? No, in the past Americans dusted themselves off and continued to live as free men and women. You see, when we live in fear and radically alter our way of life just to feel a little more secure, we lose. We have let someone else steal our freedom and our dignity.
But now in the name of “security” all kinds of bizarre proposals have been implemented on the local, state and national levels. Somehow we think that if everything that we do is watched, monitored and analyzed we will all be safer somehow.
Maybe we are safer and maybe we aren’t, but we are certainly a whole lot less free.
The following are 20 signs that the United States is rapidly becoming a totalitarian ”Big Brother” police state….
#1) A new bill being pushed by Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman would allow the U.S. military to round up large numbers of Americans and detain them indefinitely without a trial if they “pose a threat” or if they have “potential intelligence value” or for any other reason the President of the United States “considers appropriate”.
#2) Lawmakers in Washington D.C. working to create a new immigration bill have decided on a way to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants: a national biometric identification card all American workers would be required to obtain.
#3) Barack Obama is backing a plan to create a national database to store the DNA of people who have been arrested but not necessarily convicted of a crime.
#4) Just to get on an airplane, Americans will now have to go through new full-body scanners that reveal every detail of our exposed bodies to airport security officials.
#5) If that wasn’t bad enough, the Transportation Security Administration has announced that airport screeners will begin roving through airports randomly taking chemical swabs from passengers and their bags to check for explosives.
#6) Starting this upcoming December, some passengers on Canadian airlines flying to, from or even over the United States without ever landing there, will only be allowed to board their flights once the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has determined they are not terrorists.
#7) Organic milk is such a threat that the FDA has been conducting military style raids on Amish farmers in Pennsylvania.
#8) An NYPD officer has broken his silence and has confessed that innocent citizens are being set up and falsely arrested and ticketed in order to meet quotas.
#9) A growing number of police departments across the U.S. are turning to mobile camera systems in order to fight motor vehicle theft and identify unregistered cars.
#10) For decades, Arizona has been known as “the sunset state”, but lately many frustrated residents have started calling it “the surveillance state”.
#11) Judges and police in Florida have been caught using “secret codes” on tickets in the state of Florida.
#12) An extensive investigation has revealed that between 2003 and 2007, that state of Texas quietly gave hundreds of newborn baby blood samples to a U.S. Armed Forces laboratory for use in a forensics database.
#13) A 6-year-old girl was recently handcuffed and sent to a mental facility after throwing temper tantrums at her elementary school.
#14) One 12-year-old girl in New York was recently arrested and marched out of her school in handcuffs just because she doodled on her desk.
#15) In Florida, students have been arrested by police for things as simple as bringing a plastic butter knife to school, throwing an eraser, and drawing a picture of a gun.
#16) When a mother on a flight to Denver spanked both of her children and cussed out a flight attendant who tried to intervene, she suddenly found herself handcuffed and headed for prison. Why? She was charged with being a domestic terrorist under the Patriot Act.
#17) A new global treaty may force U.S. Internet service providers to spy on what you do online.
#18) A leaked Obama administration memo has revealed plans for the federal government to seize more than 10 million acres of land from Montana to New Mexico.
#19) 56 percent of Americans questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll said that the U.S. government has become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.
#20) But one other recent poll found that 51 percent of Americans agree with this statement: ”It is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism.”
PRUDEN: The First Amendment under 'progressive' siege
by Wesley Pruden
May 14,2010
ANALYSIS/OPINION:
Once upon a time we could count on lawyers and law school professors to defend the First Amendment, the most important 46 words in the Constitution. Those 46 words make everything else possible. Shut up the people and the government can shut down every other freedom.
The genius of the Founding Fathers was their ability to write the Constitution in the plain English that everybody could understand. Lawyers, who can employ entire boring paragraphs to say "good morning" (many young women have dozed off while their lawyer swains were on their knees with a proposal of marriage) would inflict damage later.
A good lawyer, or even a bad one, can put loopholes in any proposal. To wit, Elena Kagans explanation of the First Amendment. It's perfectly OK, she wrote in the University of Chicago Law Review, for the government to restrict free speech as long as it means well and calls it something else. The word "restrictions" sounds bad, like a leather restraint, but Mzz Kagan's "redistribution of speech" can sound benign, like free cheese. Who doesn't like cheese? She argued that the government can employ Orwellian restrictions on speech if it thinks such speech might "harm" others, either by direct action or inciting someone else to take direct action. Who gets to decide when such restrictions are imposed for the greater good? Why, the government, of course.
Here's how the Founding Fathers, ever suspicious of ambitious Lilliputians, wrote the guarantee of free speech: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Note that the First Amendment does not say that Congress "should" make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or that it would be nice if it didn't. The operative words are "shall make no law."
The Constitution has "evolved" since then, of course, and now the liberal left, led by the Warren Court and its bastard progeny, has discovered all manner of "emanations" and "penumbra," like an embedded Da Vinci code, that the Constitution doesn't really mean what the words say it means. What part of "shall" can Mzz Kagan not understand?
She does not identify, exactly, what speech the government could regard as inflicting such "harm" as to justify suspending the Constitution, but she offers as examples incitement to violence, "hate speech" and "fighting words." Since certain friends of the White House have suggested that "tea party" activists may have already been guilty of sedition, we can imagine what some of the violations might one day be.
President Obama's selection of Mzz Kagan is of a piece with what is emerging as his operating philosophy of government. The president's thin skin, his irritation with constructive criticism, is well known, and we can all be sympathetic. Who among us relishes criticism? But he's not content to retire to the cosseting comfort of the Oval Office to sulk. He complained to the Class of '10 at Hampton University the other day that Internet blogs, certain cable television networks and talk radio make life tough and inconvenient at the White House. Mzz Kagan's "redistribution of speech" could fix this.
Elena Kagan has no large body of work that makes it easy to see what kind of justice she might be. This is the most important reason the president selected her. The White House is trying to keep her away from even the most polite questions until she has to face softballs from sympathetic senators. He expects quick partisan confirmation. So he can't object to the despised pundits, bloggers, cable-TV commentators and radio talk-show hosts and guests speculating from whatever meager hints and clues they find in her past. Mr. Obama himself is the model for these speculators.
He was frustrated by the lack of a paper trail for Harriet Miers, the White House lawyer for George W. Bush and a Supreme Court nominee whom Elena Kagan, with her abundant inexperience, resembles in many ways. Mr. Obama, then a very junior U.S. senator, called Mzz Miers "a blank slate" and said that "in the absence of a judicial record" she would have to be more forthcoming, and the White House would have to be more forthcoming, in answering fundamental questions about who she really was. Mr. Bush, properly chastened by the uproar over the Miers nomination, much of it led by conservatives, summoned the grace to withdraw the nomination.
• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
May 14,2010
Elena Kagan, the nominee for solicitor general
The Washington TimesANALYSIS/OPINION:
Once upon a time we could count on lawyers and law school professors to defend the First Amendment, the most important 46 words in the Constitution. Those 46 words make everything else possible. Shut up the people and the government can shut down every other freedom.
The genius of the Founding Fathers was their ability to write the Constitution in the plain English that everybody could understand. Lawyers, who can employ entire boring paragraphs to say "good morning" (many young women have dozed off while their lawyer swains were on their knees with a proposal of marriage) would inflict damage later.
A good lawyer, or even a bad one, can put loopholes in any proposal. To wit, Elena Kagans explanation of the First Amendment. It's perfectly OK, she wrote in the University of Chicago Law Review, for the government to restrict free speech as long as it means well and calls it something else. The word "restrictions" sounds bad, like a leather restraint, but Mzz Kagan's "redistribution of speech" can sound benign, like free cheese. Who doesn't like cheese? She argued that the government can employ Orwellian restrictions on speech if it thinks such speech might "harm" others, either by direct action or inciting someone else to take direct action. Who gets to decide when such restrictions are imposed for the greater good? Why, the government, of course.
Here's how the Founding Fathers, ever suspicious of ambitious Lilliputians, wrote the guarantee of free speech: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Note that the First Amendment does not say that Congress "should" make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or that it would be nice if it didn't. The operative words are "shall make no law."
The Constitution has "evolved" since then, of course, and now the liberal left, led by the Warren Court and its bastard progeny, has discovered all manner of "emanations" and "penumbra," like an embedded Da Vinci code, that the Constitution doesn't really mean what the words say it means. What part of "shall" can Mzz Kagan not understand?
She does not identify, exactly, what speech the government could regard as inflicting such "harm" as to justify suspending the Constitution, but she offers as examples incitement to violence, "hate speech" and "fighting words." Since certain friends of the White House have suggested that "tea party" activists may have already been guilty of sedition, we can imagine what some of the violations might one day be.
President Obama's selection of Mzz Kagan is of a piece with what is emerging as his operating philosophy of government. The president's thin skin, his irritation with constructive criticism, is well known, and we can all be sympathetic. Who among us relishes criticism? But he's not content to retire to the cosseting comfort of the Oval Office to sulk. He complained to the Class of '10 at Hampton University the other day that Internet blogs, certain cable television networks and talk radio make life tough and inconvenient at the White House. Mzz Kagan's "redistribution of speech" could fix this.
Elena Kagan has no large body of work that makes it easy to see what kind of justice she might be. This is the most important reason the president selected her. The White House is trying to keep her away from even the most polite questions until she has to face softballs from sympathetic senators. He expects quick partisan confirmation. So he can't object to the despised pundits, bloggers, cable-TV commentators and radio talk-show hosts and guests speculating from whatever meager hints and clues they find in her past. Mr. Obama himself is the model for these speculators.
He was frustrated by the lack of a paper trail for Harriet Miers, the White House lawyer for George W. Bush and a Supreme Court nominee whom Elena Kagan, with her abundant inexperience, resembles in many ways. Mr. Obama, then a very junior U.S. senator, called Mzz Miers "a blank slate" and said that "in the absence of a judicial record" she would have to be more forthcoming, and the White House would have to be more forthcoming, in answering fundamental questions about who she really was. Mr. Bush, properly chastened by the uproar over the Miers nomination, much of it led by conservatives, summoned the grace to withdraw the nomination.
• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
Firefighters, Architects, & Engineers team up to expose 9/11 Myths
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/6786531
(Click on arrow at the bottom left of the screen to stay on current page)
Editor's Note: This event has already occured on May 8,2010, but I decided to post it for those who missed the program
9/11 Myths Exposed: Firefighters, Architects and Engineers Re–investigate the Destruction of the Three World Trade Center Skyscrapers
On September 11th, 2001 the greatest destruction and loss of life associated with the terrorist attacks took place in New York City. After almost nine years and numerous government investigations, many public misconceptions persist about the events of that tragic day, especially regarding the unprecedented destruction of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan.
During this live multimedia presentation Seattle firefighter Erik Lawyer and SF Bay Area architect Richard Gage, AIA, will examine the myths surrounding the events at the World Trade Center. Using well–documented forensic evidence, news footage and eyewitness accounts, they seek to correct the public record. Some of the myths they will address:
• Only two towers collapsed that day
• Jet fuel fires melted the structural steel
• The fires were hot enough to weaken the structural steel
• The floors of each building collapsed like “pancakes”
• The government investigations were thorough, complete and followed standard fire investigation procedures
• The government investigators tested for evidence of exotic accelerants and/or explosives
• The third building to collapse completely, WTC 7, suffered significant structural damage from the collapse of the Twin Towers
The presentation will provide a factual rebuttal of these and other myths regarding the destruction of the World Trade Center.
Erik Lawyer is a 14–year veteran of the Seattle Fire Department and the founder of Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, an organization with over 100 firefighters calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the WTC buildings.
Richard Gage, AIA, has practiced architecture for over 20 years and is the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization with over 1,000 architects and engineers calling for a new 9/11 WTC investigation.
Tom Sullivan — former employee of Controlled Demlition, Inc
Laila Selk — retired firefighter
Jason Abney — retired firefighter
Kamal Obeid, S.E. — structural engineer
Ron Brookman, S.E. — structural engineer
Michele Little — 9/11 victim family member
Peter B. Collins — talk show host
Source: http://cms.ae911truth.org/
CBO Says Obamacare May Exceed $1 Trillion
NewsMax.com
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 07:28 AM
President Obama's new health-care law could potentially add at least $115 billion more to government health care spending over the next 10 years, if Congress approves all the additional spending called for in the legislation, congressional budget referees said Tuesday.
That would push the 10-year cost of the overhaul above $1 trillion -- an unofficial limit the Obama administration set early on.
Read the entire article
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 07:28 AM
President Obama's new health-care law could potentially add at least $115 billion more to government health care spending over the next 10 years, if Congress approves all the additional spending called for in the legislation, congressional budget referees said Tuesday.
That would push the 10-year cost of the overhaul above $1 trillion -- an unofficial limit the Obama administration set early on.
Read the entire article
Eric Holder Pushes for Modification of Miranda Rights
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!
Mark Matheny
If Eric Holder gets his way, you will still have "the right to remain silent" - but only after police question you.
Attorney General Eric Holder appeared May 9,2010 on ABC's "This Week" saying that the Obama administration is open to the idea of a modification of Miranda protections in light of growing "threats we now face"
The Supreme Court did not specify the exact wording to use when informing a suspect of their rights. However, the Court did create a set of guidelines that must be followed. The ruling states:
Mark Matheny
Attorney General Eric Holder appeared May 9,2010 on ABC's "This Week" saying that the Obama administration is open to the idea of a modification of Miranda protections in light of growing "threats we now face"
"The [Miranda] system we have in place has proven to be effective...I think we also want to look and determine whether we have the necessary flexibility -- whether we have a system that deals with situations that agents now confront. ... We're now dealing with international terrorism. ... I think we have to give serious consideration to at least modifying that public-safety exception [to the Miranda protections]. And that's one of the things that I think we're going to be reaching out to Congress, to come up with a proposal that is both constitutional, but that is also relevant to our times and the threats that we now face." [1]
The Supreme Court did not specify the exact wording to use when informing a suspect of their rights. However, the Court did create a set of guidelines that must be followed. The ruling states:
“ ...The person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he or she has the right to remain silent, and that anything the person says will be used against that person in court; the person must be clearly informed that he or she has the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, and that, if he or she is indigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent her or him. ” (emphasis added) [2]
As a result, American English developed the verb Mirandize, meaning "to read the Miranda warning" to a suspect (when the suspect is arrested). [3]
The whole guise behind this abrogation of our right to remain silent, being pushed by Holder and our administration, is a possible threat that a suspect "might" have information that he will not want to divulge once he is told he or she has the right to remain silent. The argument to give non citizens the same Miranda rights as Americans is for the sole purpose of categorizing "homegrown" and foreign terrorists under miranda rights so they can then amend the Miranda right and interrogate foreign and homegrown terrorists before they are given their miranda rights. This would then include every American since we all have the same Miranda rights as the "terrorists" would have!
This is a further attack on our constitution and individual rights. Look at it from a Problem - Reaction - Solution way:
- Capture enemy prisoners of war and torture them by waterboarding, sleep deprivation etc.
- Allow the public to find out about these "atrocities" through the media in order to bring outrage.
- Suggest that these "foreign enemy combatants" be allowed to have miranda rights under the protection of the United States, and be tried in Civilian courts like all Americans.
- Now start to report through the media how "homegrown terrorists" are becoming a threat to the security of the U.S. (Now Foreign terrorists and homegrown terrorists all fall under "Miranda" rights)
- Then suggest that the Miranda rights need to be amended so that Law Enforcement can "question-interrogate" as needed anyone who falls under the perameters of recieving miranda rights, before they recieve their "right to remain silent" and the information recieved can still be used then in a court of law against the suspect!
This is unbelieveable! Do you see the the spin they are trying to put on the American people? If we let them amend this right, anyone of us could be interrogated before recieving our "right to remain silent"!
What would be the point of having "a right to remain silent" if you have no right to remain silent - until after they interrogate you?
1 http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video/interview-eric-holder-10596851
2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning
3 .Mirandize". The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Houghton Mifflin Company.
2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning
3 .Mirandize". The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Houghton Mifflin Company.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Mercola.com Posted by: Dr. Mercola December 05 2009 22,565 views Jordan McFarland, a 14-year-old boy from Virginia, is weak and s...
-
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! Mark Matheny September 29, 2010 In the ongoing "War of Terror" being perpetuated by the military Indust...
-
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! Mark Matheny There has been lots of talk about a coming food crisis due to the massive looting of the nations und...




