(AP) WASHINGTON (AP) - You have the right to remain silent, but only if you tell the police that you're remaining silent.
You have a right to a lawyer - before, during and after questioning, even though the police don't have to tell you exactly when the lawyer can be with you. If you can't afford a lawyer, one will be provided to you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you, which, by the way, are only good for the next two weeks?
The Supreme Court made major revisions to the now familiar Miranda warnings this year. The rulings will change the ways police, lawyers and criminal suspects interact amid what experts call an attempt to pull back some of the rights that Americans have become used to over recent decades.
The high court has made clear it's not going to eliminate the requirement that police officers give suspects a Miranda warning, so it is tinkering around the edges, said Jeffrey L. Fisher, co-chair of the amicus committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
"It's death by a thousand cuts," Fisher said. "For the past 20-25 years, as the court has turned more conservative on law and order issues, it has been whittling away at Miranda and doing everything it can to ease the admissibility of confessions that police wriggle out of suspects."
The court placed limits on the so-called Miranda rights three times during the just-ended session. Experts viewed the large number of rulings as a statistical aberration, rather than a full-fledged attempt to get rid of the famous 1966 decision. The original ruling emerged from police questioning of Ernesto Miranda in a rape and kidnapping case in Phoenix. It required officers to tell suspects taken into custody that they have the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can't afford one.
The court's three decisions "indicate a desire to prune back the rules somewhat," Kent Scheidegger, the legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a victims' rights group. "But I don't think any overruling of Miranda is in the near future. I think that controversy is pretty much dead."
The Supreme Court in 2000 upheld the requirement that the Miranda warning be read to criminal suspects.
This year's Supreme Court decisions did not mandate changes in the wording of Miranda warnings read by arresting police officers. The most common version is now familiar to most Americans, thanks to television police shows: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?"
However, the court did approve one state version of the Miranda warnings that did not specifically inform suspects that they had a right to have a lawyer present during their police questioning.
The Miranda warning used in parts of Florida told suspects: "You have the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any of our questions. If you cannot afford to hire a lawyer, one will be appointed for you without cost and before any questioning. You have the right to use any of these rights at any time you want during this interview."
Article Continues
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The Art Of Resisting Zionist Terrorism
By Michael James in Germany
8-3-10
You are being murdered. You are hated and despised. You are excess to requirement.
You know this. What you don't know is that you are the willing participant in your own destruction.
Laugh not, my friend, for though you do not perceive your ultimate end by a million cuts, you are slowly bleeding to death; even though you sit there wasting your time in trivial pursuits, watching television or dulling what few vestiges are left remaining of your intellectual wherewithal in expending your last functioning brain cells in gawking at distracting mainstream media news and meaningless tittle-tattle that excites nothing more than your basest instincts.
You were created in the image of an unimaginably gracious Lightness of Being more transcendentally magnificent than you could ever dare to imagine in this fallen, materialistic, satanically Zionist world. You are a prisoner of your own volition. An addict unto your own selfish and egoistic desires.
You are consumed with worry and anxiety. Why? Because you are a consumer, not a human being. Beings who take on the form of humanity are not consumers, but creators. Creators of their own destiny. Endowed with an imagination and an ability to innovate, even beyond all of the laws of physics (for humans IN BEING are metaphysical creatures), you Yes, Sir my fellow brother who lives in a trailer on a dollar a day or who slaves around the clock for an exploitative employer for just a few quid an hour are infinitely more powerful than you would ever hope to dare.
On this planet, regardless of race, creed or colour, every man is a King and every woman a Queen.
Please allow me to reiterate: The greedy fascist bastard you work for is merely a mortal being in human form who obsesses over money, the precious fragility of his own brittle ego and, perhaps, his inability to satisfy his wife or mistress in a way commensurate with his own sexual self-perception. He is not invulnerable. He empties his bowels each evening in fear of the retribution with which he may meet lest he fails to deliver on-the-line to his major investors. He may act tough; but he is less than those he employs. Terror rules his life.
Terror, by means of a strategy of tension, rules all of our lives if we allow it so. Although I consider myself a veteran of many political struggles, most of which I won at great pain to myself and those who loved me, I would never deign to impart to you advice as to how best you may be able to avoid the pitfalls of treachery that the Kabbalist World Order has opened before every tentative step you take in your journey through life as an inquisitive, naturally loving human being. But I shall make a few humble suggestions.
My first advisory principle is this: Have no fear. The ruling classes and their elite, super-rich clients rely upon maintaining social control by instilling fear within what they regard as 'Joe and Josephine McPublic', who, as I have already stated, are ROYALTY: natural-born, self-autonomous, FREE citizens.
My second advisory principle is this: Destroy your television set, or donate it to a psychopathic brain-dead cretin. Do you really need to listen to all that 'pop' garbage that despoils and meta-forms your mind by means of radio? You may argue that it helps you in your daily tasks, providing you with a smart musical overture that glides you painlessly through the day. Have you ever asked yourself why it is that you cannot possibly clean your apartment or cook dinner for the kids without listening to pornographic 'Gangsta Rap'? Do the messages of criminal hoodlums, as mediated by their Zionist-controlled music companies, really help you to catch that last little piece of dust at the end of the window ledge?
Just take a look at all the other mind-controlling government-sponsored crap you have lying around in your living room, and ask yourself: "Do I really need this shit?"
No, of course you don't. But THEY have convinced you that a daily subscription to an mainstream media publication, one thousand channels of Zionist hell, and a constant blare of illuminati-inspired trash music are somehow essential to your ability to function as a natural BEING in human form.
Deep down inside, you already know that your addiction to comforting, self-reinforcing 'positivistic' mind control is harmful to your natural development as a FREETHINKING being in human form. But, my, oh my, how difficult it is to take a sledgehammer to that Image of the Beast. And bestiality it is: every aspect of human nature is degraded and laid bare for those receptive enough to become moulded unto this world, to become IN-formed, inwardly DE-formed.
You were born into this world, regardless, or on account of your 'social disadvantages' and 'physical handicaps' to overcome, to conquer, to set new frontiers in pushing further the horizons of all things imaginable; for those things that, in our generation are imaginable, are more possibly realised in the next.
My third advisory principle is this: Do not participate in their game by voting. Democracy is a scam. Imagine that they gave an election, and nobody came. But, lest you do so, vote for the candidate, probably an independent, who betrays the least signs of psychopathology. Never, ever, under any circumstances, vote for a candidate backed by an established Zionist or Freemason-controlled political crime syndicate, such as, in America, the Democrats or Republicans, or, in Germany, the Israeli-financed Murder-Incorporated war criminals, the CDU, CSU, FDP and the eco-fascist Green Party.
If you're British, beware of Zionist-owned political groupings, such as the British National Party, the Labour Party or the English Defence League. They serve only the interests of an illegal apartheid and deeply racist, fascist state known as 'Israel'. They are neither patriots nor romantic nationalists, but, rather a grouping of (in many cases) sincere men and women who have unwittingly allowed themselves to be profiled as future 'useful idiots' in the furtherance of a brutal One World Executive. (In the case of the virulently anti-Muslim English Defence League, we're talking about direct finance from USAID and Tel Aviv. Intelligent British lads my people brainwashed by Zionist robots who care not one jot as to their welfare.)
My fourth advisory principle is this: Release yourself of any anger you hold in your heart, whether directed against yourself or any other human being. Most of us are angry, not because we perceive flaws in those around us, but because we are singularly unable to come to terms with, or, at least, change, those aspects of ourselves that bring us the most grief.
I really despise the practitioners of 'Positive Thinking', if only because I defend the right of those who feel empowered by adopting the power of 'Negative Thinking'. The world is not paradise, and none of us can ever help to make it so; and even if it was, you can be sure that some Chosenite would come along and drop a huge turd upon the bed of our dreams.
Which brings us to the question I guess most of you have been waiting to hear: What about the Jews?
Well, what about them? Those I knew at school, college and in my profession as a freelancer in London were, to me, just as English and decent as English and decent could be. Some became my best friends. They weren't parasites or scroungers, but remembered my favours in terms of a Scotch or a much-needed cigarette. I loved the guys, and so it did not bother me in the least that most of them slid almost seamlessly into positions of executive authority into almost all divisions of the corporate UK media. I put it down to 'talent', or that universal cop-out, 'synergy'.
Article continues at Rense
8-3-10
You are being murdered. You are hated and despised. You are excess to requirement.
You know this. What you don't know is that you are the willing participant in your own destruction.
Laugh not, my friend, for though you do not perceive your ultimate end by a million cuts, you are slowly bleeding to death; even though you sit there wasting your time in trivial pursuits, watching television or dulling what few vestiges are left remaining of your intellectual wherewithal in expending your last functioning brain cells in gawking at distracting mainstream media news and meaningless tittle-tattle that excites nothing more than your basest instincts.
You were created in the image of an unimaginably gracious Lightness of Being more transcendentally magnificent than you could ever dare to imagine in this fallen, materialistic, satanically Zionist world. You are a prisoner of your own volition. An addict unto your own selfish and egoistic desires.
You are consumed with worry and anxiety. Why? Because you are a consumer, not a human being. Beings who take on the form of humanity are not consumers, but creators. Creators of their own destiny. Endowed with an imagination and an ability to innovate, even beyond all of the laws of physics (for humans IN BEING are metaphysical creatures), you Yes, Sir my fellow brother who lives in a trailer on a dollar a day or who slaves around the clock for an exploitative employer for just a few quid an hour are infinitely more powerful than you would ever hope to dare.
On this planet, regardless of race, creed or colour, every man is a King and every woman a Queen.
Please allow me to reiterate: The greedy fascist bastard you work for is merely a mortal being in human form who obsesses over money, the precious fragility of his own brittle ego and, perhaps, his inability to satisfy his wife or mistress in a way commensurate with his own sexual self-perception. He is not invulnerable. He empties his bowels each evening in fear of the retribution with which he may meet lest he fails to deliver on-the-line to his major investors. He may act tough; but he is less than those he employs. Terror rules his life.
Terror, by means of a strategy of tension, rules all of our lives if we allow it so. Although I consider myself a veteran of many political struggles, most of which I won at great pain to myself and those who loved me, I would never deign to impart to you advice as to how best you may be able to avoid the pitfalls of treachery that the Kabbalist World Order has opened before every tentative step you take in your journey through life as an inquisitive, naturally loving human being. But I shall make a few humble suggestions.
My first advisory principle is this: Have no fear. The ruling classes and their elite, super-rich clients rely upon maintaining social control by instilling fear within what they regard as 'Joe and Josephine McPublic', who, as I have already stated, are ROYALTY: natural-born, self-autonomous, FREE citizens.
My second advisory principle is this: Destroy your television set, or donate it to a psychopathic brain-dead cretin. Do you really need to listen to all that 'pop' garbage that despoils and meta-forms your mind by means of radio? You may argue that it helps you in your daily tasks, providing you with a smart musical overture that glides you painlessly through the day. Have you ever asked yourself why it is that you cannot possibly clean your apartment or cook dinner for the kids without listening to pornographic 'Gangsta Rap'? Do the messages of criminal hoodlums, as mediated by their Zionist-controlled music companies, really help you to catch that last little piece of dust at the end of the window ledge?
Just take a look at all the other mind-controlling government-sponsored crap you have lying around in your living room, and ask yourself: "Do I really need this shit?"
No, of course you don't. But THEY have convinced you that a daily subscription to an mainstream media publication, one thousand channels of Zionist hell, and a constant blare of illuminati-inspired trash music are somehow essential to your ability to function as a natural BEING in human form.
Deep down inside, you already know that your addiction to comforting, self-reinforcing 'positivistic' mind control is harmful to your natural development as a FREETHINKING being in human form. But, my, oh my, how difficult it is to take a sledgehammer to that Image of the Beast. And bestiality it is: every aspect of human nature is degraded and laid bare for those receptive enough to become moulded unto this world, to become IN-formed, inwardly DE-formed.
You were born into this world, regardless, or on account of your 'social disadvantages' and 'physical handicaps' to overcome, to conquer, to set new frontiers in pushing further the horizons of all things imaginable; for those things that, in our generation are imaginable, are more possibly realised in the next.
My third advisory principle is this: Do not participate in their game by voting. Democracy is a scam. Imagine that they gave an election, and nobody came. But, lest you do so, vote for the candidate, probably an independent, who betrays the least signs of psychopathology. Never, ever, under any circumstances, vote for a candidate backed by an established Zionist or Freemason-controlled political crime syndicate, such as, in America, the Democrats or Republicans, or, in Germany, the Israeli-financed Murder-Incorporated war criminals, the CDU, CSU, FDP and the eco-fascist Green Party.
If you're British, beware of Zionist-owned political groupings, such as the British National Party, the Labour Party or the English Defence League. They serve only the interests of an illegal apartheid and deeply racist, fascist state known as 'Israel'. They are neither patriots nor romantic nationalists, but, rather a grouping of (in many cases) sincere men and women who have unwittingly allowed themselves to be profiled as future 'useful idiots' in the furtherance of a brutal One World Executive. (In the case of the virulently anti-Muslim English Defence League, we're talking about direct finance from USAID and Tel Aviv. Intelligent British lads my people brainwashed by Zionist robots who care not one jot as to their welfare.)
My fourth advisory principle is this: Release yourself of any anger you hold in your heart, whether directed against yourself or any other human being. Most of us are angry, not because we perceive flaws in those around us, but because we are singularly unable to come to terms with, or, at least, change, those aspects of ourselves that bring us the most grief.
I really despise the practitioners of 'Positive Thinking', if only because I defend the right of those who feel empowered by adopting the power of 'Negative Thinking'. The world is not paradise, and none of us can ever help to make it so; and even if it was, you can be sure that some Chosenite would come along and drop a huge turd upon the bed of our dreams.
Which brings us to the question I guess most of you have been waiting to hear: What about the Jews?
Well, what about them? Those I knew at school, college and in my profession as a freelancer in London were, to me, just as English and decent as English and decent could be. Some became my best friends. They weren't parasites or scroungers, but remembered my favours in terms of a Scotch or a much-needed cigarette. I loved the guys, and so it did not bother me in the least that most of them slid almost seamlessly into positions of executive authority into almost all divisions of the corporate UK media. I put it down to 'talent', or that universal cop-out, 'synergy'.
Article continues at Rense
The Man with the Bullhorn is a Lying Sack of Shit.
Smoking Mirrors
Dog Poet Transmitting…….
Well… I have to say it sometime. I didn’t want to say it because the next thing you know, someone will ask me why I let Jeff Rense link me or some other crap about something that isn't real and which I knowingly appreciate. I was astounded when Michael Rivero stopped printing my work and didn’t answer my emails but I never said anything bad about Michael. I just said I didn’t understand. Readers here know that I was perplexed and some readers said I should denounce Michael, since he was probably listening to his handlers. I never believed that and Michael stayed in my links and I always went to see what he thought was important because I trusted him to be honest and real. It didn’t matter what he thought of me.
The time came, over a year later, when I saw that Michael needed money to keep going because a certain Zionist controlled entity was no longer willing to pay him for his specialty contribution. I smelled a rat but there was no way I was going to write anything about it unless I asked Michael first. I wanted to help him and it didn’t matter what he thought about me which, I thought had to do with my talking about the divine so much. He doesn’t really know if there is one or not and I think he would tell you so but he doesn’t like religion and neither do I… neither do I.
I wrote him to ask for the information and he said, basically, “Screw all of that. What do you mean by, how I feel about you? I love your wonderful writings.” I thought, WTF? It turned out that, all of a sudden, he never had gotten any of my mail and this went on for two weeks during a period when it had never happened before. My not denouncing him made me feel pretty good in the aftermath.
Then that thing happened with Rense where, all of a sudden, I wasn’t on the site again. Once again I was perplexed, except in this case, I didn’t have anything to do with being on the site in the first place. I’m a curious guy. I discussed at a much earlier time how, when I first heard Jeff Rense speak, that the tenor of his voice made me keep listening. It was as if he could not sound like he did, at least to my ears, if he weren’t real. When I was suddenly gone from his site, the only thing I said was that maybe that Chomsky quote on his page had something to do with it. Nothing happened. People told me they had written Jeff and it got forgotten. A few weeks later I got an email from a Rense reader and contributor of my work who said that the only reason I hadn’t appeared, or had disappeared was because he was on vacation. Then I got some emails from Jeff that blew my mind with his courtesy and professed appreciation. Reader’s… never burn your bridges with people just because you ego, which you think you don’t have, gets offended by something you don’t understand.
People still tell me bad things about Jeff and Michael and Rixon from the Truthseeker too. Rixon is the only one that never put me aside, no matter the reason …but Rixon also was tested here because a crazy Texas hairdresser told him I was a major drug supplier. You would think, in that case, I would have some when I wanted them (grin); such is not the reality. Rixon found out on his own and has been a strong friend and a tireless advocate of getting me out there. I sometimes question his choices of writers and sometimes I wonder at Michael and his personal windmills. I don’t know enough about Jeff to have an opinion like that but… today, I got to say something about that blowhard with a bullhorn and I try to be understanding, like I was in these other cases but I got to call it like I see it when those I know, who are doing the good work, get screwed by those presenting themselves as truth tellers.
Read More...
Dog Poet Transmitting…….
Well… I have to say it sometime. I didn’t want to say it because the next thing you know, someone will ask me why I let Jeff Rense link me or some other crap about something that isn't real and which I knowingly appreciate. I was astounded when Michael Rivero stopped printing my work and didn’t answer my emails but I never said anything bad about Michael. I just said I didn’t understand. Readers here know that I was perplexed and some readers said I should denounce Michael, since he was probably listening to his handlers. I never believed that and Michael stayed in my links and I always went to see what he thought was important because I trusted him to be honest and real. It didn’t matter what he thought of me.
The time came, over a year later, when I saw that Michael needed money to keep going because a certain Zionist controlled entity was no longer willing to pay him for his specialty contribution. I smelled a rat but there was no way I was going to write anything about it unless I asked Michael first. I wanted to help him and it didn’t matter what he thought about me which, I thought had to do with my talking about the divine so much. He doesn’t really know if there is one or not and I think he would tell you so but he doesn’t like religion and neither do I… neither do I.
I wrote him to ask for the information and he said, basically, “Screw all of that. What do you mean by, how I feel about you? I love your wonderful writings.” I thought, WTF? It turned out that, all of a sudden, he never had gotten any of my mail and this went on for two weeks during a period when it had never happened before. My not denouncing him made me feel pretty good in the aftermath.
Then that thing happened with Rense where, all of a sudden, I wasn’t on the site again. Once again I was perplexed, except in this case, I didn’t have anything to do with being on the site in the first place. I’m a curious guy. I discussed at a much earlier time how, when I first heard Jeff Rense speak, that the tenor of his voice made me keep listening. It was as if he could not sound like he did, at least to my ears, if he weren’t real. When I was suddenly gone from his site, the only thing I said was that maybe that Chomsky quote on his page had something to do with it. Nothing happened. People told me they had written Jeff and it got forgotten. A few weeks later I got an email from a Rense reader and contributor of my work who said that the only reason I hadn’t appeared, or had disappeared was because he was on vacation. Then I got some emails from Jeff that blew my mind with his courtesy and professed appreciation. Reader’s… never burn your bridges with people just because you ego, which you think you don’t have, gets offended by something you don’t understand.
People still tell me bad things about Jeff and Michael and Rixon from the Truthseeker too. Rixon is the only one that never put me aside, no matter the reason …but Rixon also was tested here because a crazy Texas hairdresser told him I was a major drug supplier. You would think, in that case, I would have some when I wanted them (grin); such is not the reality. Rixon found out on his own and has been a strong friend and a tireless advocate of getting me out there. I sometimes question his choices of writers and sometimes I wonder at Michael and his personal windmills. I don’t know enough about Jeff to have an opinion like that but… today, I got to say something about that blowhard with a bullhorn and I try to be understanding, like I was in these other cases but I got to call it like I see it when those I know, who are doing the good work, get screwed by those presenting themselves as truth tellers.
Read More...
The Social Security Scam – Why all taxpayers must file income tax returns
You have been told that Social Security is an insurance program run by the federal government. You were led to believe that your income would be taxed at a certain rate for the cost of the program. Then in times of medical emergency or upon retirement you would be eligible for Social Security benefits. On the surface, this would seem to be an equitable arrangement.
But the federal government failed to fully inform you as to all of the other ramifications of applying for a Social Security number. For instance, did you know that you became a federal employee? Well, you did - specifically you became a member of the Merchant Marine. You also became an employee of a corporation that is involved with importing to and from the U.S. possessions. Another consideration is that if FICA is based upon a percentage of your earnings, then the government has somehow been granted the right to know the amount of your income and the sources of your income – this is not a hallmark of freedom. These statements and more will be evidenced by the actual federal statutes and regulations further on this page.
Like all great magicians, the federal government has you looking at the obvious while hiding the basis of the trick that the magician is performing right in front of your eyes.
Lots of Americans have questioned the legitimacy of the personal income tax, but it seems that everyone just loves the Social Security program. Social Security is the sacred cow that no one is ever supposed to criticize. Oh, sure, some claimants of Social Security find fault with what claims are denied or only partially funded. And lots of people are now pointing out that Social Security is not going to be solvent in the near future. But up till now no one has questioned the legitimacy of the Social Security program. Well, that time has come.
Americans now live in a country with the largest government in the world. Since the Declaration of Independence is the organic law of the land and it states that “all men are created equal”, why would free, equal people need such a large government?
How did a country in which “all men are created equal” (and, of course, women) end up subservient to a multitude of federal government agencies? If all Americans are created equal, how can some bureaucrat from the EPA regulate how an American’s land is to be used? How can some bureaucrat from the FDA regulate what an American can choose for healthcare? How can some bureaucrat from the SEC regulate how an American can invest money? How can some bureaucrat from the IRS regulate how much of an American’s money the federal government can take? How can some bureaucrat within the Department of Labor dictate what an American may pay his employees? How can some bureaucrat within the Department of Education determine what an American’s children must be taught?
A real crime consists of a victim and a perpetrator. The perpetrator has either initiated force or fraud against the victim. This means that the victim’s rights have been violated. The two sides are drawn in this type of scenario and the laws against theft, murder, rape, etc. are clear. A court action may be initiated and the jury may deliberate after hearing all of the testimony. This upholds the premise that “all men are created equal”.
But when some federal government agency files a complaint against an American, what is the basis of the crime? The federal agency simply cites some regulation that the American violated – no victim is identified, no one’s rights have been violated. This does not uphold the premise that “all men are created equal”, but presumes that the federal government, through some bureaucratic agency, can force an American to do its bidding. How did this happen? The answer is buried deep in the Social Security scam. Applying for a Social Security number is tantamount to begging to be subservient to the federal government.
The following is somewhat complicated because it is the actual basis of the federal laws. After all, it’s not easy to subjugate an entire nation of free, sovereign people. But everything that I’ve written above will be legally verified and the actual basis of the regulations and statutes will be evidenced.
This site will forever end the conflict between the various “tax honesty movement” groups and the enforcement of the internal revenue laws. First of all, when dealing with the federal government of the United States, one must learn the definitions of the government’s legal “terms”. So let’s start with the definition of the term “taxpayer”.
From the regulations that implement the Internal Revenue Code, the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), are the following:
“26 CFR Sec. 2.1(m) The terms used in this section shall have the same meaning as in chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code.”
”26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1, Definitions
(a) As used in the regulations in this part, except as otherwise expressly provided -
(1) Act means the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. 27)
(2) Section means one of the sections of the regulations in this part.
(5) Taxpayer means a citizen who has established or seeks to establish a construction reserve fund under the provisions of section 511 of the Act and the regulations in this part, and may include a partnership.
(b) Insofar as the computation and collection of taxes are concerned, other terms used in the regulations in this part, except as otherwise provided, have the same meaning as in the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations thereunder.”
Now since the regulation above at 26 CFR Sec. 2.1(m) states that the terms used in this section have the same meaning as in chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code, the definition of the term “taxpayer” from 26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1(a)(5) has the same meaning as in chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code. And since 26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1(b) states insofar as the computation and collection of taxes are concerned, the definition of “taxpayer” from 26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1(a)(5) has the same meaning as in the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations that implement the Code.
The number “26″ from the cites above is the number of the title, in this case title 26 is “internal revenue”. The number before the “.” from the cites above is the part number under the title, in this case “2″. The first number after the “.” from the cites above is the section number, in this case “1″. Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code, referenced within the first of the above regulations, has to do with income tax.
The definition of the term “taxpayer” proves that a “taxpayer” is a federal employee, specifically within the Merchant Marine. Federal employment taxes only apply to federal employees. Did you know the definition of “taxpayer”? You must understand that when the government defines a “term” it no longer has anything to do with the original definition of the word as found in a dictionary.
The only definitions of “taxpayer” within chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code are at 26 USC Sec. 1313(b) and 26 USC Sec. 7701(a)(14). Both of these definitions vaguely define a “taxpayer” as someone subject to an internal revenue tax, but what “internal revenue” itself is remains unsaid.
Read More...
But the federal government failed to fully inform you as to all of the other ramifications of applying for a Social Security number. For instance, did you know that you became a federal employee? Well, you did - specifically you became a member of the Merchant Marine. You also became an employee of a corporation that is involved with importing to and from the U.S. possessions. Another consideration is that if FICA is based upon a percentage of your earnings, then the government has somehow been granted the right to know the amount of your income and the sources of your income – this is not a hallmark of freedom. These statements and more will be evidenced by the actual federal statutes and regulations further on this page.
Like all great magicians, the federal government has you looking at the obvious while hiding the basis of the trick that the magician is performing right in front of your eyes.
Lots of Americans have questioned the legitimacy of the personal income tax, but it seems that everyone just loves the Social Security program. Social Security is the sacred cow that no one is ever supposed to criticize. Oh, sure, some claimants of Social Security find fault with what claims are denied or only partially funded. And lots of people are now pointing out that Social Security is not going to be solvent in the near future. But up till now no one has questioned the legitimacy of the Social Security program. Well, that time has come.
Americans now live in a country with the largest government in the world. Since the Declaration of Independence is the organic law of the land and it states that “all men are created equal”, why would free, equal people need such a large government?
How did a country in which “all men are created equal” (and, of course, women) end up subservient to a multitude of federal government agencies? If all Americans are created equal, how can some bureaucrat from the EPA regulate how an American’s land is to be used? How can some bureaucrat from the FDA regulate what an American can choose for healthcare? How can some bureaucrat from the SEC regulate how an American can invest money? How can some bureaucrat from the IRS regulate how much of an American’s money the federal government can take? How can some bureaucrat within the Department of Labor dictate what an American may pay his employees? How can some bureaucrat within the Department of Education determine what an American’s children must be taught?
A real crime consists of a victim and a perpetrator. The perpetrator has either initiated force or fraud against the victim. This means that the victim’s rights have been violated. The two sides are drawn in this type of scenario and the laws against theft, murder, rape, etc. are clear. A court action may be initiated and the jury may deliberate after hearing all of the testimony. This upholds the premise that “all men are created equal”.
But when some federal government agency files a complaint against an American, what is the basis of the crime? The federal agency simply cites some regulation that the American violated – no victim is identified, no one’s rights have been violated. This does not uphold the premise that “all men are created equal”, but presumes that the federal government, through some bureaucratic agency, can force an American to do its bidding. How did this happen? The answer is buried deep in the Social Security scam. Applying for a Social Security number is tantamount to begging to be subservient to the federal government.
The following is somewhat complicated because it is the actual basis of the federal laws. After all, it’s not easy to subjugate an entire nation of free, sovereign people. But everything that I’ve written above will be legally verified and the actual basis of the regulations and statutes will be evidenced.
This site will forever end the conflict between the various “tax honesty movement” groups and the enforcement of the internal revenue laws. First of all, when dealing with the federal government of the United States, one must learn the definitions of the government’s legal “terms”. So let’s start with the definition of the term “taxpayer”.
From the regulations that implement the Internal Revenue Code, the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), are the following:
“26 CFR Sec. 2.1(m) The terms used in this section shall have the same meaning as in chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code.”
”26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1, Definitions
(a) As used in the regulations in this part, except as otherwise expressly provided -
(1) Act means the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. 27)
(2) Section means one of the sections of the regulations in this part.
(5) Taxpayer means a citizen who has established or seeks to establish a construction reserve fund under the provisions of section 511 of the Act and the regulations in this part, and may include a partnership.
(b) Insofar as the computation and collection of taxes are concerned, other terms used in the regulations in this part, except as otherwise provided, have the same meaning as in the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations thereunder.”
Now since the regulation above at 26 CFR Sec. 2.1(m) states that the terms used in this section have the same meaning as in chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code, the definition of the term “taxpayer” from 26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1(a)(5) has the same meaning as in chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code. And since 26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1(b) states insofar as the computation and collection of taxes are concerned, the definition of “taxpayer” from 26 CFR Sec. 2.1-1(a)(5) has the same meaning as in the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations that implement the Code.
The number “26″ from the cites above is the number of the title, in this case title 26 is “internal revenue”. The number before the “.” from the cites above is the part number under the title, in this case “2″. The first number after the “.” from the cites above is the section number, in this case “1″. Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code, referenced within the first of the above regulations, has to do with income tax.
The definition of the term “taxpayer” proves that a “taxpayer” is a federal employee, specifically within the Merchant Marine. Federal employment taxes only apply to federal employees. Did you know the definition of “taxpayer”? You must understand that when the government defines a “term” it no longer has anything to do with the original definition of the word as found in a dictionary.
The only definitions of “taxpayer” within chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code are at 26 USC Sec. 1313(b) and 26 USC Sec. 7701(a)(14). Both of these definitions vaguely define a “taxpayer” as someone subject to an internal revenue tax, but what “internal revenue” itself is remains unsaid.
Read More...
HOW ADL WANTS TO OUTLAW CHRISTIANS
By Rev. Ted Pike
2 Aug 10
Few familiar with the 97 year history of the Anti-Defamation League would deny its ambition to destroy the Christian/conservative right. ADL’s first great step was passing its federal hate crimes law last fall. The next stage was indicated last week by national director Abe Foxman. He said 80 million Americans are “anti-Semitic”—40 million “seriously infected” and 40 million “mildly” so.
What is Foxman’s reason for ensnaring so many in such a preposterously wide net? He is spinning a mythology that anti-Semitism in America is a “serious national problem”—one, like the “epidemic” of hate crimes, to be met with federal legislation.
Foxman is moving us toward a federal “anti-Semitism” law - probably under the expanded jurisdiction of ADL's Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. If Foxman has his way, it could become a federal hate crime to engage in speech he considers anti-Semitic: alleging Jews have too much power in government, finance, or media, as well as voicing "strong" criticism of Israel. It would also include the New Testament claim that Jews killed Christ.
To understand the future, know the past. Over the last 25 years, ADL has persuaded liberals that hate crimes had indeed escalated to the point of crisis—a crisis that only a federal hate law could cope with. ADL thinks big—the bigger the lie, the bolder ADL states it as fact.
But ADL does more than distort facts. It turns upside down the most fundamental terms and values that govern civilization.
In 1988, ADL sponsored a national competition to create a model anti-hate law for America. At the time, few outside Canada and Sweden had ever heard of a “hate crime.” From the beginning, ADL lassoed its conceptual hate crimes noose around the largest number of people. It redefined a characteristic we all possess for good or bad: “bias.” ADL blackened the reputation of all bias (except bias against Christian/conservative values). ADL made bias equivalent to “hate.” It then relentlessly conditioned police, educators, the media, etc., that prejudice and intolerance (i.e., hate) were so evil, especially when motivating a crime, that a biased criminal act should be punished with at least triple penalties.
Quantifying “Hate”
But did hate crimes of the magnitude ADL claims really exist? No. ADL had to create its own hate crime reality. In 1990, it persuaded Congress to enact its Hate Crimes Statistics Act, empowering the federal government to require annual reporting of hate crimes from the states. ADL also instructed police in America on its twisted definitions, permitting them to report to the FBI as a “hate crime” any altercation, name-calling, or accusation which police believed was motivated by bias. As a result, ADL was able to “document” about 7500 hate crimes annually. At least 95 percent were never determined to be an actual crime in a court of law. Even when so ludicrously inflated, such “crimes” constitute 1/15 th of 1 percent of actual, documented annual crime in America.
Yet the sleight of hand worked. After sensitizing America to the threat of “hate,” and stacking up an annual 7500 “hate crimes,” ADL was able to dramatize the “epidemic” of hate enough to put President Obama’s signature on the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2010.
The federal hate law now exalts homosexuals, Jews, blacks, Muslims and women with preferential rights to federal hate crimes protection. The only reason the hate law has not been implemented with the kind of persecutive force felt in Canada, Sweden, and Australia is that the Christian/conservative right (very largely educated by the National Prayer Network over the past 20 years) has at last made hate laws an extremely volatile issue. Indeed, this issue could unseat Democrats in November. Nevertheless, ADL’s federal law pulsates in its potential to persecute Christians and conservatives as soon as the time is favorable.
ADL doesn’t want to wait. Ever proactive, ADL now wants the public to believe that the potential hate crime of anti-Semitism pervades America especially among Christians and conservatives. To this end, Foxman began his latest video with the biggest lie he could muster: that 45 years ago, one of three Americans was “seriously infected” with anti-Semitism. That’s nearly 65 million people! This incredibly audacious lie is to confirm ADL’s constant assertion that America has a long and stubborn history of Jew hatred residing in the "extremist" right - bigotry which ADL and its 45 state hate laws helped subdue. Foxman implies that with 80 million anti-Semites in America today, we must more than ever depend on ADL.
In 1965, when a third of Americans were supposedly anti-Semitic, I was a freshman in college. In my entire life to that time, outside of our family, I cannot remember hearing Israel or Jews criticized. Forty-five years ago, Israel was riding a titanic wave of popularity—practically the whole western world unconditionally cheered its “miraculous” rebirth. Israel was not criticized for its terrorist expropriation of 800,000 Palestinians in 1948 or any of its actions in the 1967 or 1973 wars against the Arabs. Except for its participation in the 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacres in Lebanon, there was almost no worldwide criticism of Israel’s saturation bombing of 19,500 innocent refugees in southern Lebanon. Not until Sharon’s brutal invasion of the West Bank in 2002 did world opinion significantly rise against Israel. It has especially escalated since the 2009 siege of Gaza, and recently, its terrorist raid on the "Free Gaza" flotilla, killing nine activists.
In 1965, there did exist a small minority of opinion critical of Jewish supremacism, largely subsisting off earlier information provided by voices such as Winston Churchill, Charles Lindberg, Father Coughlin, Gerald L. K. Smith, and Elizabeth Dilling. The largest emerging anti-Zionist voice came from Liberty Lobby out of Washington, DC. Yet such relatively underground dissent did not translate into any appreciable degree of popular criticism of Jews or Israel. Where does Foxman, then, get his figure of 1 in 3 Americans at that time being “seriously infected” with anti-Semitism? It comes from the same place he gets his assertion that 80 million Americans are Jew haters—his creativity as a liar. Such incredible prevarication springs from his desire to condition the American public that anti-Semitism, like hate crimes, is now a much greater national epidemic than anyone imagined. Foxman, a primary architect of the federal hate bill knows exactly what he is doing—what works.
With great forethought, he thus defines in his latest video that anti-Semitism is belief in the New Testament account that the Jews had Christ killed —implicating as anti-Semites all Bible-believing Christians worldwide. Foxman claims that, from the time of the church fathers, the charge that Jews were “Christ-killers” has been a homicidally destructive feature of Christianity. It, more than anything else, has provided fuel for the ovens of Dachau and Auschwitz. In his book, Never Again: The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism, Foxman says of European Christians what he largely still believes about many Bible-believing Christians today: “...the political and social atmosphere in which the persecution and killing of millions of Jews could be seen as broadly acceptable could not have existed without the tacit acceptance of the Christian churches, as well as the ingrained anti-Semitism of 20 centuries of dogma, doctrine and preaching that demonized Jews.” He quotes Elie Wiesel, “…the killings could not have happened without the sins of millions of Christians, sins of commission as well as sins of omission.” (pg. 94)
Foxman contends that Christianity’s anti-Semitism is so intrinsic that belief in a literal interpretation of the New Testament remains a potent threat to the Jewish people. Thus, Christianity’s capacity to create more Holocausts won’t end until laws in every nation proscribe public proclamation of New Testament teaching, especially concerning the Jews. Such "anti-Semitism" includes Christian evangelism of Jews, which Foxman in his book says, "is inherently anti-Semitic in that it implicitly denigrates the value of Jewish belief." (pg. 138)
ADL: Anti-Semitism is a “Disease”
In Foxman’s latest video, he also insinuates that the 80 million Americans “infected” with anti-Semitism are victims of a disease. This suggests that criticism of matters Jewish is a psychiatric disorder. Foxman’s Bolshevik forbearers confined critics of Jewish communists, not just to prisons, but psychiatric hospitals. Reputable Swedish evangelists testify that under Sweden’s ADL-inspired hate law, just criticizing Jews or Israel can land you in a psychiatric hospital for up to a year of drug rehabilitation—even before trial!
I had hoped the power of the evangelical right could thwart the momentum of ADL’s federal hate law. It couldn’t—very largely because leaders of the New Right knew ADL was behind hate laws and feared being called “anti-Semitic” by criticizing a venerable Jewish “civil liberties” organization. Their fear of ADL still exceeds their fear of a Christian-persecuting Gestapo – and, I believe, their fear of a God who commands they speak the whole, undiminished truth.
ADL is now in stage two, encircling the religious right with its “noose” of accusation, negatively stereotyping Bible-believers as those who portray Jews as “Christ-killers.” Will Christian/conservative leaders still refuse to publicly acknowledge ADL’s threat to the survival of Christianity? Probably. As ADL pushes for punishment of anti-Semitism under the present federal hate law, it knows Evangelical leaders will never want to seem to be in favor of anti-Semitism by opposing such inclusion. Far from exposing and resisting ADL such leaders will doubtless continue to respond to ADL in a way that delights it and is crucial to its ultimate success.
They give ADL what it wants most from them: silence.
Source
2 Aug 10
Few familiar with the 97 year history of the Anti-Defamation League would deny its ambition to destroy the Christian/conservative right. ADL’s first great step was passing its federal hate crimes law last fall. The next stage was indicated last week by national director Abe Foxman. He said 80 million Americans are “anti-Semitic”—40 million “seriously infected” and 40 million “mildly” so.
What is Foxman’s reason for ensnaring so many in such a preposterously wide net? He is spinning a mythology that anti-Semitism in America is a “serious national problem”—one, like the “epidemic” of hate crimes, to be met with federal legislation.
Foxman is moving us toward a federal “anti-Semitism” law - probably under the expanded jurisdiction of ADL's Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. If Foxman has his way, it could become a federal hate crime to engage in speech he considers anti-Semitic: alleging Jews have too much power in government, finance, or media, as well as voicing "strong" criticism of Israel. It would also include the New Testament claim that Jews killed Christ.
To understand the future, know the past. Over the last 25 years, ADL has persuaded liberals that hate crimes had indeed escalated to the point of crisis—a crisis that only a federal hate law could cope with. ADL thinks big—the bigger the lie, the bolder ADL states it as fact.
But ADL does more than distort facts. It turns upside down the most fundamental terms and values that govern civilization.
In 1988, ADL sponsored a national competition to create a model anti-hate law for America. At the time, few outside Canada and Sweden had ever heard of a “hate crime.” From the beginning, ADL lassoed its conceptual hate crimes noose around the largest number of people. It redefined a characteristic we all possess for good or bad: “bias.” ADL blackened the reputation of all bias (except bias against Christian/conservative values). ADL made bias equivalent to “hate.” It then relentlessly conditioned police, educators, the media, etc., that prejudice and intolerance (i.e., hate) were so evil, especially when motivating a crime, that a biased criminal act should be punished with at least triple penalties.
Quantifying “Hate”
But did hate crimes of the magnitude ADL claims really exist? No. ADL had to create its own hate crime reality. In 1990, it persuaded Congress to enact its Hate Crimes Statistics Act, empowering the federal government to require annual reporting of hate crimes from the states. ADL also instructed police in America on its twisted definitions, permitting them to report to the FBI as a “hate crime” any altercation, name-calling, or accusation which police believed was motivated by bias. As a result, ADL was able to “document” about 7500 hate crimes annually. At least 95 percent were never determined to be an actual crime in a court of law. Even when so ludicrously inflated, such “crimes” constitute 1/15 th of 1 percent of actual, documented annual crime in America.
Yet the sleight of hand worked. After sensitizing America to the threat of “hate,” and stacking up an annual 7500 “hate crimes,” ADL was able to dramatize the “epidemic” of hate enough to put President Obama’s signature on the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2010.
The federal hate law now exalts homosexuals, Jews, blacks, Muslims and women with preferential rights to federal hate crimes protection. The only reason the hate law has not been implemented with the kind of persecutive force felt in Canada, Sweden, and Australia is that the Christian/conservative right (very largely educated by the National Prayer Network over the past 20 years) has at last made hate laws an extremely volatile issue. Indeed, this issue could unseat Democrats in November. Nevertheless, ADL’s federal law pulsates in its potential to persecute Christians and conservatives as soon as the time is favorable.
ADL doesn’t want to wait. Ever proactive, ADL now wants the public to believe that the potential hate crime of anti-Semitism pervades America especially among Christians and conservatives. To this end, Foxman began his latest video with the biggest lie he could muster: that 45 years ago, one of three Americans was “seriously infected” with anti-Semitism. That’s nearly 65 million people! This incredibly audacious lie is to confirm ADL’s constant assertion that America has a long and stubborn history of Jew hatred residing in the "extremist" right - bigotry which ADL and its 45 state hate laws helped subdue. Foxman implies that with 80 million anti-Semites in America today, we must more than ever depend on ADL.
In 1965, when a third of Americans were supposedly anti-Semitic, I was a freshman in college. In my entire life to that time, outside of our family, I cannot remember hearing Israel or Jews criticized. Forty-five years ago, Israel was riding a titanic wave of popularity—practically the whole western world unconditionally cheered its “miraculous” rebirth. Israel was not criticized for its terrorist expropriation of 800,000 Palestinians in 1948 or any of its actions in the 1967 or 1973 wars against the Arabs. Except for its participation in the 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacres in Lebanon, there was almost no worldwide criticism of Israel’s saturation bombing of 19,500 innocent refugees in southern Lebanon. Not until Sharon’s brutal invasion of the West Bank in 2002 did world opinion significantly rise against Israel. It has especially escalated since the 2009 siege of Gaza, and recently, its terrorist raid on the "Free Gaza" flotilla, killing nine activists.
In 1965, there did exist a small minority of opinion critical of Jewish supremacism, largely subsisting off earlier information provided by voices such as Winston Churchill, Charles Lindberg, Father Coughlin, Gerald L. K. Smith, and Elizabeth Dilling. The largest emerging anti-Zionist voice came from Liberty Lobby out of Washington, DC. Yet such relatively underground dissent did not translate into any appreciable degree of popular criticism of Jews or Israel. Where does Foxman, then, get his figure of 1 in 3 Americans at that time being “seriously infected” with anti-Semitism? It comes from the same place he gets his assertion that 80 million Americans are Jew haters—his creativity as a liar. Such incredible prevarication springs from his desire to condition the American public that anti-Semitism, like hate crimes, is now a much greater national epidemic than anyone imagined. Foxman, a primary architect of the federal hate bill knows exactly what he is doing—what works.
With great forethought, he thus defines in his latest video that anti-Semitism is belief in the New Testament account that the Jews had Christ killed —implicating as anti-Semites all Bible-believing Christians worldwide. Foxman claims that, from the time of the church fathers, the charge that Jews were “Christ-killers” has been a homicidally destructive feature of Christianity. It, more than anything else, has provided fuel for the ovens of Dachau and Auschwitz. In his book, Never Again: The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism, Foxman says of European Christians what he largely still believes about many Bible-believing Christians today: “...the political and social atmosphere in which the persecution and killing of millions of Jews could be seen as broadly acceptable could not have existed without the tacit acceptance of the Christian churches, as well as the ingrained anti-Semitism of 20 centuries of dogma, doctrine and preaching that demonized Jews.” He quotes Elie Wiesel, “…the killings could not have happened without the sins of millions of Christians, sins of commission as well as sins of omission.” (pg. 94)
Foxman contends that Christianity’s anti-Semitism is so intrinsic that belief in a literal interpretation of the New Testament remains a potent threat to the Jewish people. Thus, Christianity’s capacity to create more Holocausts won’t end until laws in every nation proscribe public proclamation of New Testament teaching, especially concerning the Jews. Such "anti-Semitism" includes Christian evangelism of Jews, which Foxman in his book says, "is inherently anti-Semitic in that it implicitly denigrates the value of Jewish belief." (pg. 138)
ADL: Anti-Semitism is a “Disease”
In Foxman’s latest video, he also insinuates that the 80 million Americans “infected” with anti-Semitism are victims of a disease. This suggests that criticism of matters Jewish is a psychiatric disorder. Foxman’s Bolshevik forbearers confined critics of Jewish communists, not just to prisons, but psychiatric hospitals. Reputable Swedish evangelists testify that under Sweden’s ADL-inspired hate law, just criticizing Jews or Israel can land you in a psychiatric hospital for up to a year of drug rehabilitation—even before trial!
I had hoped the power of the evangelical right could thwart the momentum of ADL’s federal hate law. It couldn’t—very largely because leaders of the New Right knew ADL was behind hate laws and feared being called “anti-Semitic” by criticizing a venerable Jewish “civil liberties” organization. Their fear of ADL still exceeds their fear of a Christian-persecuting Gestapo – and, I believe, their fear of a God who commands they speak the whole, undiminished truth.
ADL is now in stage two, encircling the religious right with its “noose” of accusation, negatively stereotyping Bible-believers as those who portray Jews as “Christ-killers.” Will Christian/conservative leaders still refuse to publicly acknowledge ADL’s threat to the survival of Christianity? Probably. As ADL pushes for punishment of anti-Semitism under the present federal hate law, it knows Evangelical leaders will never want to seem to be in favor of anti-Semitism by opposing such inclusion. Far from exposing and resisting ADL such leaders will doubtless continue to respond to ADL in a way that delights it and is crucial to its ultimate success.
They give ADL what it wants most from them: silence.
Source
Monday, August 2, 2010
The ADL Spying Case Is Over, But The Struggle Continues
By Jeffrey Blankfort, Anne Poirier and Steve Zeltzer – Plaintiffs in the of ADL Spying Case
In 1993, the District of Attorney of San Francisco released 700 pages of documents implicating the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that claims to be a defender of civil rights, in a vast spying operation directed against American citizens who were opposed to Israel’s policies in the Occupied West Bank and Gaza and to the apartheid policies of the government of South Africa and passing on information to both governments.
Under great political pressure, Smith later dropped the charges. One wonders what would have happened had an Arab-American or Muslim organization been caught spying with the names of 10,000 people and 600 organizations in their files.
Not only were critics of Israel under ADL’s surveillance, including thousands of Arab-Americans, but labor organizations such as the San Francisco Labor Council, ILWU Local 10, and the Oakland Educational Association, and civil rights groups such as the NAACP, Irish Northern Aid, International Indian Treaty Council and the Asian Law Caucus were also found in the “pinko” files of ADL’s undercover operative, Roy Bullock.
Moreover, Bullock, who had worked, off the books, for the ADL for more than 25 years, admitted that he had been reporting on the activities of black South African exiles and American anti- apartheid activists for South African intelligence.
Bullock, pretending to be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, came to the founding meeting of the Labor Committee of the Middle in 1987 at the home of plaintiff Steve Zeltzer, having met Zeltzer at meetings of the Free Moses Mayekiso Defense
Committee, a South African labor solidarity committee in which he also infiltrated under false pretenses.
Having been responsible for exposing Bullock as an ADL agent to the media, we joined together with other Bay Area activists in filing a suit against the ADL for violation of our privacy rights as provided in California law.
Almost a decade later the suit has been settled with a significant cash payment by the ADL and, we wish to emphasize, without our signing any agreement for confidentiality which the ADL had previously demanded. Our efforts to expose the organization’s work in defending the policies of the Israeli government and stifling its opponents will continue, using new information gained in the pursuance of the suit.
The ADL spent millions of dollars preventing this case from coming to trial through costly appeals and exploiting the judicial process but, at the end, it had to give up..
During the course of the suit we learned that:
Bullock, the ADL’s top “fact finder” had sold confidential information to a South African intelligence agent in San Francisco for $15,000.
Ten days before he was assassinated in South Africa, Chris Hani, the man who would have succeeded Nelson Mandela as the country’s president, was trailed by Bullock on a trip through California who reported on it to the South African government.
ADL agent Roy Bullock was discovered to have a floor plan of murdered Los Angeles Arab American leader Alex Odeh and a key to his office.
The ADL supplied confidential information to foreign governments that it obtained from police and federal agencies in the US,
Having infiltrated the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), the ADL’s “fact finder” performed a COINTEL-type operation at the convention of the Holocaust-denying Journal of Historical Review when he put ADC’s literature on convention tables as a way of smearing the committee for “working with anti- Semites.”
The ADL has organized to silence and eliminate all critical voices of Israel from academia and the media and has targeted professors , particularly those who are African American, and who are critical of Israel.
That at least 51% of the activities of its San Francisco office were devoted to defending Israel.
The ADL provided secret files to police agencies when these police agencies were prevented by law from collecting the files themselves,
Many questions must still be answered about the activities of the ADL and it’s non-profit status as an “education organization”. The settlement offered by the ADL is recognition on its part that it could not afford to go to a trial in front of a jury and face the likelihood that more of its dirty secrets would be revealed.
We call on all people to make sure that these practices on the part of the ADL are not allowed to continue and that the double standard that presently dominates this country on issues dealing with Israel be eliminated.
Finally, we wish to thank our attorney, former congressman Pete McCloskey, himself a victim of the ADL and the Israel Lobby, for his years of work on our behalf and his steadfast commitment to the pursuit of justice.
Source
In 1993, the District of Attorney of San Francisco released 700 pages of documents implicating the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that claims to be a defender of civil rights, in a vast spying operation directed against American citizens who were opposed to Israel’s policies in the Occupied West Bank and Gaza and to the apartheid policies of the government of South Africa and passing on information to both governments.
Under great political pressure, Smith later dropped the charges. One wonders what would have happened had an Arab-American or Muslim organization been caught spying with the names of 10,000 people and 600 organizations in their files.
Not only were critics of Israel under ADL’s surveillance, including thousands of Arab-Americans, but labor organizations such as the San Francisco Labor Council, ILWU Local 10, and the Oakland Educational Association, and civil rights groups such as the NAACP, Irish Northern Aid, International Indian Treaty Council and the Asian Law Caucus were also found in the “pinko” files of ADL’s undercover operative, Roy Bullock.
Moreover, Bullock, who had worked, off the books, for the ADL for more than 25 years, admitted that he had been reporting on the activities of black South African exiles and American anti- apartheid activists for South African intelligence.
Bullock, pretending to be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, came to the founding meeting of the Labor Committee of the Middle in 1987 at the home of plaintiff Steve Zeltzer, having met Zeltzer at meetings of the Free Moses Mayekiso Defense
Committee, a South African labor solidarity committee in which he also infiltrated under false pretenses.
Having been responsible for exposing Bullock as an ADL agent to the media, we joined together with other Bay Area activists in filing a suit against the ADL for violation of our privacy rights as provided in California law.
Almost a decade later the suit has been settled with a significant cash payment by the ADL and, we wish to emphasize, without our signing any agreement for confidentiality which the ADL had previously demanded. Our efforts to expose the organization’s work in defending the policies of the Israeli government and stifling its opponents will continue, using new information gained in the pursuance of the suit.
The ADL spent millions of dollars preventing this case from coming to trial through costly appeals and exploiting the judicial process but, at the end, it had to give up..
During the course of the suit we learned that:
Bullock, the ADL’s top “fact finder” had sold confidential information to a South African intelligence agent in San Francisco for $15,000.
Ten days before he was assassinated in South Africa, Chris Hani, the man who would have succeeded Nelson Mandela as the country’s president, was trailed by Bullock on a trip through California who reported on it to the South African government.
ADL agent Roy Bullock was discovered to have a floor plan of murdered Los Angeles Arab American leader Alex Odeh and a key to his office.
The ADL supplied confidential information to foreign governments that it obtained from police and federal agencies in the US,
Having infiltrated the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), the ADL’s “fact finder” performed a COINTEL-type operation at the convention of the Holocaust-denying Journal of Historical Review when he put ADC’s literature on convention tables as a way of smearing the committee for “working with anti- Semites.”
The ADL has organized to silence and eliminate all critical voices of Israel from academia and the media and has targeted professors , particularly those who are African American, and who are critical of Israel.
That at least 51% of the activities of its San Francisco office were devoted to defending Israel.
The ADL provided secret files to police agencies when these police agencies were prevented by law from collecting the files themselves,
Many questions must still be answered about the activities of the ADL and it’s non-profit status as an “education organization”. The settlement offered by the ADL is recognition on its part that it could not afford to go to a trial in front of a jury and face the likelihood that more of its dirty secrets would be revealed.
We call on all people to make sure that these practices on the part of the ADL are not allowed to continue and that the double standard that presently dominates this country on issues dealing with Israel be eliminated.
Finally, we wish to thank our attorney, former congressman Pete McCloskey, himself a victim of the ADL and the Israel Lobby, for his years of work on our behalf and his steadfast commitment to the pursuit of justice.
Source
Revered Rabbi Preaches Slaughter Of Gentile Babies
Nazareth: A rabbi from one of the most violent settlements in the West Bank was questioned on suspicion of incitement last week as Israeli police stepped up their investigation into a book in which he sanctions the killing of non-Jews, including children and babies.
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira is one of the leading ideologues of the extreme wing of the religious settler movement. He is known to be a champion of the “price-tag” policy of reprisal attacks on Palestinians, including punishing them for attempts by officials to enforce Israeli law against the settlements.
So far the policy has chiefly involved violent harassment of Palestinians, with settlers inflicting beatings, attacking homes, throwing stones, burning fields, killing livestock and poisoning wells.
It is feared, however, that Shapira’s book The King’s Torah, published last year, is intended to offer ideological justifications for widening the scope of such attacks to include killing Palestinians, even children.
Although Shapira was released a few hours after his questioning last Monday, dozens of rabbis, as well as several members of parliament, rallied to his side, condemning the arrest.
Shlomo Aviner, one of the settlement movement’s spiritual leaders, defended the book’s arguments as a “legitimate stance” and one that should be taught in Jewish seminaries.
But in a sign of mounting official unease at Shapira’s influence on the settlement movement, the Israeli military authorities also threatened last week to enforce a decade-old demolition order on Yitzhar’s seminary, which was built without a permit.
Dror Etkes, a Tel Aviv-based expert on the settlements, said the order was unlikely to be carried out but was a way to pressure Yitzhar’s 500 inhabitants to rein in their more violent attacks.
He said the authorities had begun taking a harder line against Yitzhar only since Shapira and several of his students were suspected of torching a mosque in the neighbouring village of Yasuf last December.
“Shapira is trying to redefine the conflict with the Palestinians, turning it from a national conflict into a religious one. That frightens Israel. It doesn’t want to look as though it is fighting the whole Islamic world,” Etkes said.
He added that the rabbi and his supporters were closely associated with Kach, a movement founded by the late Rabbi Meir Kahane that demands the expulsion of all Palestinians from a “Greater Israel”. Despite Kach being banned, officials have largely turned a blind eye as its ideology has flourished in the settlements.
“It may be illegal to call oneself Kach but the authorities are more than tolerant of settlers who hold such views and carry out violent attacks. In fact, what Kahane was doing in the 1980s seems like child’s play compared with today’s settlers.”
In the 230-page book, Shapira and his co-author, Rabbi Yosef Elitzur, also from Yitzhar, argue that Jewish law permits the killing of non-Jews in a wide variety of circumstances. The terms “gentiles” and “non-Jews” in the book are widely understood as references to Palestinians.
They write that Jews have the right to kill gentiles in any situation in which “a non-Jew’s presence endangers Jewish lives” even if the gentile is “not at all guilty for the situation that has been created”.
The book sanctions the killing of non-Jewish children and babies: “There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”
The rabbis suggest that harming the children of non-Jewish leaders is justified if it is likely to bring pressure to bear on them to change policy.
The authors also advocate committing “cruel deeds to create the proper balance of terror” and treating all members of an “enemy nation” as targets for retaliation, even if they are not directly participating in hostile activities.
The rabbis appear to be offering justifications in Jewish law for collective punishment and other war crimes of the kind committed by the Israeli army in its attack on Gaza in the winter of 2008.
Pamphlets similarly calling on soldiers to “show no mercy” were distributed by the army’s rabbinate as troops prepared for the Gaza operation, in which 1,400 Palestinians, the majority of them civilians, were killed. Religious settlers have come to dominate many combat units.
An investigation last year by Yesh Din, an Israeli human rights group, found Shapira’s seminary had received government funds worth at least $300,000 in recent years. American and British groups have also contributed tens of thousands of dollars in tax-deductible donations.
According to the Jerusalem Post newspaper, the Yitzhar settlers have responded to the demolition order against their seminary by threatening to publish documents showing that the housing and transport ministries were closely involved in the project too.
The settlers have repeatedly rampaged through nearby Palestinian villages, most notoriously in September 2008, when they were filmed shooting at homes in Assira al-Kabaliya, smashing properties and daubing Stars of David on homes. Ehud Olmert, the prime minister of the time, termed the settlers’ actions a “pogrom”.
The same year a religious student from Yitzhar was arrested for firing home-made rockets at Palestinian villages close by.
In April, Yitzhar’s settlers marched through the village of Huwara and pelted a Palestinian family’s home with stones in “reprisal” for the arrest of 11 of their number.
A settler from Yitzhar was questioned last month over the fatal shooting of a 16-year-old Palestinian, Aysar Zaban, in May, reportedly after stones were thrown at the settler’s car. The teenager was shot in the back.
Last week, the settlers attacked Burin, shooting at villagers and burning fields.
In most of these cases, the settlers who were arrested were released a short time later either by the police or the courts. In January, a Jerusalem judge freed Rabbi Shapira for lack of evidence in the arson attack on the mosque.
Yitzhak Ginsburg, an authority on Jewish law and a mentor to Shapira, was questioned by police last Thursday over his endorsement of the book. In the past Ginsburg has praised Baruch Goldstein, a settler who opened fire in Hebron’s Ibrahimi mosque in 1994, killing 29 Palestinian worshippers.
In 2003 Ginsburg was accused of incitement for publishing a book that called for the expulsion of Palestinians from Israel and the occupied territories, but the charges were dropped after he issued a “clarification statement”.
A group calling itself “Students of Yitzhak Ginsburg” recently distributed a leaflet urging Israeli soldiers to “spare your lives and the lives of your friends and show no concern for a population that surrounds us and harms us”.
What is Kach?
Kach was founded in 1971 by the late Meir Kahane, an American rabbi who immigrated to Israel. He won a seat in the Israeli parliament in 1984 on a platform of expelling all Palestinians from Israel and the occupied territories. As an MP, he drafted legislation to revoke the Israeli citizenship of non-Jews and ban sexual relations between Jews and gentiles.
The political party was banned from running for the Israeli parliament in 1988 and the movement was outlawed six years later. Although the group is considered a terrorist organisation in the United States and most of Europe, its ideology has been allowed to thrive in the settlements.
Today, dozens of rabbis espouse an interpretation of Jewish religious law identical to or worse than Kahane’s.
Michael Ben Ari, a former Kach leader, was elected as an MP last year for the far-right National Union party, which holds four seats in the 120-member parliament.
Avigdor Lieberman, who leads the parliament’s third largest party and is foreign minister, briefly joined the party before it was banned. His own party’s anti-Arab “No loyalty, no citizenship” programme includes echoes of Kahane’s ideology.
Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.
Source
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira is one of the leading ideologues of the extreme wing of the religious settler movement. He is known to be a champion of the “price-tag” policy of reprisal attacks on Palestinians, including punishing them for attempts by officials to enforce Israeli law against the settlements.
So far the policy has chiefly involved violent harassment of Palestinians, with settlers inflicting beatings, attacking homes, throwing stones, burning fields, killing livestock and poisoning wells.
It is feared, however, that Shapira’s book The King’s Torah, published last year, is intended to offer ideological justifications for widening the scope of such attacks to include killing Palestinians, even children.
Although Shapira was released a few hours after his questioning last Monday, dozens of rabbis, as well as several members of parliament, rallied to his side, condemning the arrest.
Shlomo Aviner, one of the settlement movement’s spiritual leaders, defended the book’s arguments as a “legitimate stance” and one that should be taught in Jewish seminaries.
But in a sign of mounting official unease at Shapira’s influence on the settlement movement, the Israeli military authorities also threatened last week to enforce a decade-old demolition order on Yitzhar’s seminary, which was built without a permit.
Dror Etkes, a Tel Aviv-based expert on the settlements, said the order was unlikely to be carried out but was a way to pressure Yitzhar’s 500 inhabitants to rein in their more violent attacks.
He said the authorities had begun taking a harder line against Yitzhar only since Shapira and several of his students were suspected of torching a mosque in the neighbouring village of Yasuf last December.
“Shapira is trying to redefine the conflict with the Palestinians, turning it from a national conflict into a religious one. That frightens Israel. It doesn’t want to look as though it is fighting the whole Islamic world,” Etkes said.
He added that the rabbi and his supporters were closely associated with Kach, a movement founded by the late Rabbi Meir Kahane that demands the expulsion of all Palestinians from a “Greater Israel”. Despite Kach being banned, officials have largely turned a blind eye as its ideology has flourished in the settlements.
“It may be illegal to call oneself Kach but the authorities are more than tolerant of settlers who hold such views and carry out violent attacks. In fact, what Kahane was doing in the 1980s seems like child’s play compared with today’s settlers.”
In the 230-page book, Shapira and his co-author, Rabbi Yosef Elitzur, also from Yitzhar, argue that Jewish law permits the killing of non-Jews in a wide variety of circumstances. The terms “gentiles” and “non-Jews” in the book are widely understood as references to Palestinians.
They write that Jews have the right to kill gentiles in any situation in which “a non-Jew’s presence endangers Jewish lives” even if the gentile is “not at all guilty for the situation that has been created”.
The book sanctions the killing of non-Jewish children and babies: “There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”
The rabbis suggest that harming the children of non-Jewish leaders is justified if it is likely to bring pressure to bear on them to change policy.
The authors also advocate committing “cruel deeds to create the proper balance of terror” and treating all members of an “enemy nation” as targets for retaliation, even if they are not directly participating in hostile activities.
The rabbis appear to be offering justifications in Jewish law for collective punishment and other war crimes of the kind committed by the Israeli army in its attack on Gaza in the winter of 2008.
Pamphlets similarly calling on soldiers to “show no mercy” were distributed by the army’s rabbinate as troops prepared for the Gaza operation, in which 1,400 Palestinians, the majority of them civilians, were killed. Religious settlers have come to dominate many combat units.
An investigation last year by Yesh Din, an Israeli human rights group, found Shapira’s seminary had received government funds worth at least $300,000 in recent years. American and British groups have also contributed tens of thousands of dollars in tax-deductible donations.
According to the Jerusalem Post newspaper, the Yitzhar settlers have responded to the demolition order against their seminary by threatening to publish documents showing that the housing and transport ministries were closely involved in the project too.
The settlers have repeatedly rampaged through nearby Palestinian villages, most notoriously in September 2008, when they were filmed shooting at homes in Assira al-Kabaliya, smashing properties and daubing Stars of David on homes. Ehud Olmert, the prime minister of the time, termed the settlers’ actions a “pogrom”.
The same year a religious student from Yitzhar was arrested for firing home-made rockets at Palestinian villages close by.
In April, Yitzhar’s settlers marched through the village of Huwara and pelted a Palestinian family’s home with stones in “reprisal” for the arrest of 11 of their number.
A settler from Yitzhar was questioned last month over the fatal shooting of a 16-year-old Palestinian, Aysar Zaban, in May, reportedly after stones were thrown at the settler’s car. The teenager was shot in the back.
Last week, the settlers attacked Burin, shooting at villagers and burning fields.
In most of these cases, the settlers who were arrested were released a short time later either by the police or the courts. In January, a Jerusalem judge freed Rabbi Shapira for lack of evidence in the arson attack on the mosque.
Yitzhak Ginsburg, an authority on Jewish law and a mentor to Shapira, was questioned by police last Thursday over his endorsement of the book. In the past Ginsburg has praised Baruch Goldstein, a settler who opened fire in Hebron’s Ibrahimi mosque in 1994, killing 29 Palestinian worshippers.
In 2003 Ginsburg was accused of incitement for publishing a book that called for the expulsion of Palestinians from Israel and the occupied territories, but the charges were dropped after he issued a “clarification statement”.
A group calling itself “Students of Yitzhak Ginsburg” recently distributed a leaflet urging Israeli soldiers to “spare your lives and the lives of your friends and show no concern for a population that surrounds us and harms us”.
What is Kach?
Kach was founded in 1971 by the late Meir Kahane, an American rabbi who immigrated to Israel. He won a seat in the Israeli parliament in 1984 on a platform of expelling all Palestinians from Israel and the occupied territories. As an MP, he drafted legislation to revoke the Israeli citizenship of non-Jews and ban sexual relations between Jews and gentiles.
The political party was banned from running for the Israeli parliament in 1988 and the movement was outlawed six years later. Although the group is considered a terrorist organisation in the United States and most of Europe, its ideology has been allowed to thrive in the settlements.
Today, dozens of rabbis espouse an interpretation of Jewish religious law identical to or worse than Kahane’s.
Michael Ben Ari, a former Kach leader, was elected as an MP last year for the far-right National Union party, which holds four seats in the 120-member parliament.
Avigdor Lieberman, who leads the parliament’s third largest party and is foreign minister, briefly joined the party before it was banned. His own party’s anti-Arab “No loyalty, no citizenship” programme includes echoes of Kahane’s ideology.
Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)