I have not been a fan of the Anonymous hacker group but in regards to their statements on this Bill, I cannot find anything I disagree with. It is sad that this group has to point out what we Americans should be taking to the streets over – even during our precious holiday season. Listen to it and decide for yourself:

Even the Left-leaning MTV is starting to wake up to the freedoms currently at risk with this Democratically sponsored Bill.

 
The section of the Bill in Question is Section 1031. From Thomas.gov:

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–12 84)).

(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(e) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.— The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of subsection (b)(2).

Republican Illinois Senate Mark Kirk made an excellent case for NOT SIGNING THIS BILL, and as listed below turned around and voted FOR THE BILL:

Feinstein Amendment NOT AGREED to (#62)

Senate Voting Record

From OpenCongress.org:

Remember these names next time they come up for election!

If this Bill becomes Law, our days as Reagan’s “shining City on a Hill” are truly numbered. If freedom fades here, on our watch, mankind may not find it again. In closing I’d like to leave you with the words of Thomas Jefferson from the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

If ever there was a reason for a Tea Party – IT IS NOW!

Katelynn McBride at the Star Tribune website described the decision in an article from Oct. 24th:

The City Council has arbitrarily mandated that only 30 percent of the houses on any city block can be rented out. If 10 people live on your block, only three of your neighbors can obtain rental licenses. You and six other homeowners are forbidden from renting out your homes.

Unfortunately, Dean happens to live on one of those restricted blocks. To make matters worst Dean’s case is not an isolated incident:

Holly Richard and Ted and Lauren Dzierzbicki are three other homeowners suffering under this law. Richard attended school at St. Mary’s University but has left to pursue a doctoral degree in South Dakota. The Dzierzbickis’ daughter attended school at Winona State but has graduated, and the family wants to move on.

Dean, Richard and the Dzierzbickis each have decided to leave to pursue life, liberty and happiness. They put their Winona homes on the market, hoping to sell. Unfortunately, the down economy made that difficult to do at reasonable prices. Unwilling to sell at a serious loss, their next move was to rent out the homes and at least make their monthly mortgage payments. Renting is straight out of Financial Health 101 and is what all the popular financial pundits advise struggling homeowners to do.

But that’s when these property owners ran up against the city’s rental ban. The homes cannot be sold and they cannot be lived in. Dean and Richard are temporarily saved by a short-term exception, allowing them to rent their homes for now. But that exception expires in April 2012. The Dzierzbickis’ house has stood empty for a year and a half — all because the government stops them from doing what should be their right as property owners.

To make matters even more outrageous, the government doesn’t even require that those holding one of the rental-home permits actually rent the house out.

This is turning into a growing trend that is not only hurting homeowners but also renters with the increased scarcity of places to rent, which in turn, raises rental costs. These people have teamed up with the Institute for Justice to file a lawsuit challenging the law under the Minnesota Constitution.

Episode One: Economic Freedom & Quality of Life

Across the globe, the societies that have the best quality of life are those with the highest levels of economic freedom. From lower unemployment to better-protected civil rights and cleaner environments, economic freedom is vital to improving the well-being of society, especially for the most vulnerable. Facebook.com/economicfreedom

Episode Two: Economic Freedom in America Today

For years the United States has been a world leader in economic freedom. But runaway government spending and burdensome regulations have caused a decline in economic freedom in the United States. If our economic freedom continues to fall, how will it affect our quality of life?

(NaturalNews) The US government’s assault against innocent American citizens continues to get more aggressive and just plain strange, with new reports of harassment against honest owners of ordinary lemon trees. Health Freedom Alliance (HFA) reports that officials from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) are now spying on people whom they suspect are in possession of ordinary lemon trees, and threatening them with excessive fines and even federal raids if they refuse to surrender the plants on demand.

Several years ago, Bridget Donovan, who has now been dubbed “The Lemon Tree Lady,” purchased a Meyer lemon tree from meyerlemontree.com. A resident of Wisconsin, Donovan purchased the tree legally and in full accordance with all federal and state laws regulating citrus transport, and had lovingly cultivated and cared for her indoor citrus plant for nearly three years.

Then, out of nowhere, Donovan received an unexpected letter from the USDA informing her that government officials were going to come and seize her tree and destroy it — and that she was not going to be compensated for her loss. The letter also threatened that if Donovan was found to be in possession of “regulated citrus” again, she could be fined up to $60,000.

Donovan was shocked, to say the least, as her tree was not a “regulated citrus.” The store from which she purchased it is fully legitimate, and she had done absolutely nothing wrong. But it turns out Donovan and many others who had also purchased similar citrus plants had faced, or were currently facing, the very same threats made against them by the USDA.

Most of those targeted simply surrendered their trees without trying to fight back, Donovan discovered. And while she, herself put up a hefty fight in trying to get honest answers in order to keep her tree, Donovan was eventually forced to surrender it as well. And worst of all, many of those who were told that a replacement tree would be in “compliance” later had those trees confiscated, too.

Read More>>

As required by Congress, the agency recently proposed stricter nutrition standards for school-based breakfast and lunch programs. More than 98,000 elementary and secondary schools will be affected—at a cost exceeding $3.4 billion in the next four years.
…
USDA officials acknowledge that the proposed regulations “may pose a particular challenge to implement.” What they don’t seem to get grasp is that the feds have no business dictating the vegetable choices of our children in the first place.

Read More>>

One such community recently pushing for this ban is Glen Carbon, Illinois. Glen Carbon is a small community of seemingly just strip malls with no real downtown section. It is positioned as an offshoot to historic Edwardsville, which is the county seat of Madison County Illinois, due east of St. Louis, Missouri.

During a recent board meeting discussing this topic, Mayor Rob Jackstadt stated "since May, 2010, there have been at least three documented car accidents on 159 that specifically mentioned the existence of sign walkers as a contributing factor to the accident." So basically, in almost the past year and a half there has been "at least 3" car accidents in which the driver tried to blame the accident on someone on the street corner holding a sign, am I getting that right?

As the Edwardsville Intelligencer reported, the Mayor went on to say that he also heard from businesses that did not like seeing sign walkers near or in front of their own establishments. I guess this is in oppose to other signs grouped as is typical in many strip mall parking lots.

One such local business being hurt by this decision is Glen Carbon resident Jim Daech who owns 4 Liberty Tax Service businesses AND employs 40 sign walkers at his 4 locations. In an earlier issue of the Intelligencer, he had this to say, "it’s possible that I could move my Liberty Tax just down the street in Edwardsville. I have four stores and all of them allow me to have wavers at this time." Daech also added, "it is the most cost-effective form of advertising that there is."

In support of his effective marketing methods he continued, "This is bona fide employment. It may not seem very exciting, but this is bona fide employment. They can earn good wages and it doesn’t require a lot of skill sets. It serves a legitimate purpose." He also said. "these are important jobs for the people that have them."

Another business along the highly trafficked Hwy 159 stretch in Glen Carbon is Jay Blanquart Jewelers. After owner Jay Blanquart stated that 80% of his business is generated by this effective marketing method, he went on to say "One of the reasons I moved to Glen Carbon is that you offered sign walkers and I hope that the sign walkers can stay a big part of me being able to advertise in the village." Blanquart continued. "It’s a very effective form of advertising. It has helped my business tremendously. I would ask this commission to please allow us to continue to use an effective form of advertising that’s cost effective for my business."

As reported, the new ordinance against sign walkers in Glen Carbon passed unanimously and defines sign walkers as, "Any person, regardless of whether on public or private property, with a commercial sign and/or dressed in a costume (e.g., mascot) that is intended to attract attention to the use or business being advertised.” If I am to understand "costume," also possibly defined as "uniform, " I certainly hope a local mechanic or firefighter isn’t out on the corner someday waving to anyone. I jest but with the granting of "exception, " as reported, can of course leave room for favoritism. In this case the ordinance exempts non-profit organizations (of course).

As endearing as these non-profit events are, they are not exactly known for perfectly legible handwriting on their signs. And with the limited funds non-profits usually have, you are less likely to be trying to read a printed sign on the side of the road as these now banned businesses usually have.

The bottom line, as far as the safety argument goes, is the accountability behind the wheel falls solely on the driver, unless of course the sign walker has had enough of his job and leaps onto the hood of your car. Oddly enough, driver accountability never even came up in any of the articles about the new ordinance. I found this quite surprising since the driver is usually responsible regardless of whether you are reading; a sign, a moving billboard, a text message, or are being creeped out by those freaky air sock figures.

The only other argument left is that ‘someone just doesn’t like them,’ as the Mayor made reference to on more than one occasion in the Intelligencer articles. After claiming to have listened to business owners in the area who survive on this marketing technique, the Board didn’t seem to have any trouble making up their mind in a unanimous decision. Seems to me they should be more focused on empty retail spots and less on the guy in the wind and the rain earning his pay by holding a sign.

Milwaukee allows only 321 taxicabs on its streets—almost half of which are owned by Milwaukee County Supervisor Joe Sanfelippo. That is about one cab for every 1,850 residents, one of the highest ratios in the country. This cap on taxi permits has sent permit costs skyrocketing, from $85 to $150,000—putting the dream of owning a taxi business out of most people’s reach.

Ghaleb Ibrahim is a Milwaukee entrepreneur who simply wants to own and drive his own taxicab. He has the means to operate safe and insured taxis, but the cap on the number of cabs means his dream cannot become a reality. For now if he wants to drive a cab he must do it for someone else at a hefty rental price.

It does not have to be that way. Milwaukee’s taxicab cap violates Ghaleb’s right to earn a living, protected by Wisconsin’s Constitution. That’s why on September 27, 2011, Ghaleb and two fellow drivers teamed up with the Institute for Justice to file a major civil rights lawsuit in the Milwaukee County Courthouse against the city.

The Justice department bullies Gibson without filing charges

The Federal Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. has suggested that the use of wood from India that is not finished by Indian workers is illegal, not because of U.S. law, but because it is the Justice Department’s interpretation of a law in India. (If the same wood from the same tree was finished by Indian workers, the material would be legal.) This action was taken without the support and consent of the government in India.

On August 24, 2011, around 8:45 a.m. CDT, agents for the federal government executed four search warrants on Gibson’s facilities in Nashville and Memphis and seized several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. Gibson had to cease its manufacturing operations and send workers home for the day, while armed agents executed the search warrants. Gibson has fully cooperated with the execution of the search warrants.

• Raid shut down Gibson factories and cost company money
This is the second time that federal agents have raided Gibson facilities and disrupted production – this time causing lost productivity and sales.

• Wood seized was Forest Stewardship Council Controlled

The wood the Government seized on August 24 is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier and is FSC Controlled, meaning that the wood complies with the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council, which is an industry-recognized and independent, not-for-profit organization established to promote responsible management of the world’s forests. FSC Controlled Wood standards require, among other things, that the wood not be illegally harvested and not be harvested in violation of traditional and civil rights. See www.fsc.org for more information. Gibson has a long history of supporting sustainable and responsible sources of wood and has worked diligently with entities such as the Rainforest Alliance and Greenpeace to secure FSC certified supplies. The wood seized on August 24 satisfied FSC standards.

• Nearly two years later, no charges have been filed
In 2009, more than a dozen agents with automatic weapons invaded the Gibson factory in Nashville. The Government seized guitars and a substantial amount of ebony fingerboard blanks from Madagascar. To date, 1 year and 9 months later, criminal charges have NOT been filed, yet the Government still holds Gibson’s property. Gibson has obtained sworn statements and documents from the Madagascar government and these materials, which have been filed in federal court, show that the wood seized in 2009 was legally exported under Madagascar law and that no law has been violated. Gibson is attempting to have its property returned in a civil proceeding that is pending in federal court.

The Justice Department has asked the judge to stop the court case indefinitely.

• Information sought in raid was already made available

Since 2009, Gibson has fully cooperated with the Government’s investigation of wood and has provided substantial documentation regarding Gibson’s wood-buying activities over the years. Yet, the Federal Government raided Gibson’s facilities on August 24, 2011, without warning or communication of any kind. Had the Government simply communicated with Gibson, Gibson would have cooperated without having to stop its production and send workers home.

• Not about illegal logging, not about conservation, not about the environment
The U.S. Lacey Act does not directly address conservation issues but is about obeying all laws of the countries from which wood products are procured. This law reads that you are guilty if you did not observe a law even though you had no knowledge of that law in a foreign country. The U.S. Lacey Act is only applicable when a foreign law has been violated.

• Gibson is innocent and will fight to protect its rights
Gibson has complied with foreign laws and believes it is innocent of ANY wrong doing. We will fight aggressively to prove our innocence.

For more information, please contact:

Henry E. Juszkiewicz
c/o Gibson Guitar Corp.
309 Plus Park Blvd.
Nashville, TN 37217
(615) 871-4500 Extension 2405
www.gibson.com

]]>