As you are the holder of record, I am requesting copies of the pictures of the body of Osama bin Laden. The claim of incitement is no excuse to violate the US Freedom of Information Act.
FOIA carries a presumption of disclosure; the burden is on the government - not the public - to substantiate why information may not be released. You have made no such case under any of the exemptions.
Feel free to go to the Whitehouse Email Contact Form here to make the same demand to the President to obey the law of the land.
THIS WAS THE AUTO-RESPONSE:
Thank You!
Thank you for contacting the White House.
President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible Administration in history. That begins with taking comments and questions from you, the American people, through our website.
Our office receives thousands of messages from Americans each day. We do our best to reply to as many as we can, but please be aware that you may find more information and answers to your questions online. To follow news and learn more about President Obama's plans for winning the future, you can sign up for updates from the White House, read the White House Blog, or listen to White House podcasts.
For an easy-to-navigate source of information on Federal government services, please visit: www.USA.gov.
May 4, 2011
Apr 30, 2011
The US is a republic, not a democracy. Even Corporations at least give you a proxy vote.
U.S. Treasury: China Has Decreased Its Holdings of U.S. Debt | CNSnews.com
It looks like a smart move by China. I cashed my US bonds in as well. I had to pay nearly $10k extra in taxes on the interest.It's a republic, not a democracy. If I cannot vote on the issues I see no reason to have an investment. Even private corporations give you a proxy vote.
It looks like a smart move by China. I cashed my US bonds in as well. I had to pay nearly $10k extra in taxes on the interest.It's a republic, not a democracy. If I cannot vote on the issues I see no reason to have an investment. Even private corporations give you a proxy vote.
Mar 31, 2011
Gates calls for limited role aiding Libyan rebels - Yahoo! News
Gates insisted there will be no U.S. military ground forces in Libya "as long as I am in this job."
Gates calls for limited role aiding Libyan rebels - Yahoo! News
Gates calls for limited role aiding Libyan rebels - Yahoo! News
Mar 21, 2011
Facebook Team is hopeless and helpless.
I tried to gain the assistance in the matter below: To: The Facebook Team appeals+jgnjjxe@support.facebook.com
Sent: Thu, March 17, 2011 11:45:27 AM
Subject: Getting Blank Page instead of Facebook
I am not disabled. I have checked and did not get a notification.
I note that even looking at Facebook results in a blank page.
I have used "In Private Browsing" to get to the login page to show up.
Otherwise, it does not show.
I have pinged your site to see if it is running.
Others in my house are able to log on.
As soon as I identify myself, I get a blank page again.
Is it possible your site has been hacked to send my account to a blank page?
========================================
This was their response:
Hi John,
Thanks for your email. We are sorry to hear that you are experiencing these issues with our site. Unfortunately, we do not offer functionality or technical support from this email alias. Please refer to our Help Center for answers to common questions, solutions to technical issues, and feedback from other Facebook users. You can reach the Help Center (http://www.facebook.com/help.php) by selecting "Help" at the bottom of any Facebook page.
Thanks for contacting Facebook,
Jill
User Operations
Facebook
=====================================
I wonder if FB Advertizers know about this level of "service" that FB provides.
Sent: Thu, March 17, 2011 11:45:27 AM
Subject: Getting Blank Page instead of Facebook
I am not disabled. I have checked and did not get a notification.
I note that even looking at Facebook results in a blank page.
I have used "In Private Browsing" to get to the login page to show up.
Otherwise, it does not show.
I have pinged your site to see if it is running.
Others in my house are able to log on.
As soon as I identify myself, I get a blank page again.
Is it possible your site has been hacked to send my account to a blank page?
========================================
This was their response:
Hi John,
Thanks for your email. We are sorry to hear that you are experiencing these issues with our site. Unfortunately, we do not offer functionality or technical support from this email alias. Please refer to our Help Center for answers to common questions, solutions to technical issues, and feedback from other Facebook users. You can reach the Help Center (http://www.facebook.com/help.php) by selecting "Help" at the bottom of any Facebook page.
Thanks for contacting Facebook,
Jill
User Operations
=====================================
I wonder if FB Advertizers know about this level of "service" that FB provides.
Mar 19, 2011
WANTED FOR ESPIONAGE: Julian Assange
The claims of the value of transparency would have a lot more believeability if those who did it always gave their name, home address, home phone number, and social security number to you. Those on FaceBook who make these rash claims seem to lack a profile picture of their and are not willing to expose their Faceebook information to the public.
Over 77,000 Afghans who have been helpful to their nation and ours have had their names revealed on the Net to al Qaida and the Taliban. Their information has put them in jeopardy and many of them will die for Assange's WikiTerrorism. Too bad those minimizing and justifying are not being subjected to the same dangers as they are as a learning experience. Even the Huffington Post had to look at this way:
The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International and three other groups have sent a series of e-mails to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange calling for the names of Afghan civilians to be removed from the 77,000 classified military documents published by the online whistle-blower last month.
"There was no consideration about civilian lives," Nadery said, noting a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators.
The Pentagon told Julain Assange his actions risk the lives of U.S. soldiers and Afghan citizens and could possibly undermine military operations against extremists in Afghanistan.
Members of the Taliban were studying the documents to retaliate against any informants cooperating with the U.S. military long before Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission spokesman Nadery said, "There was no consideration about civilian lives," after noticing a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators.
In Presidential Order 12958 it is clear Julian Assange is in violation in, Part 1. Original Classification, Sec. 1.1. Classification Standards that: (b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.(c) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 793 : US Code - Section 793: Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a ten year prison sentence and a $10,000 fine are the sanctions, "(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy."
Interfering with military operations and supporting America's enemies during wartime, promoting insubordination in the military, or interfering with with military recruitment are prohibited .
In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Schenck v. United States the act did not violate the free speech rights of those convicted under its provisions. While a great deal of caselaw on free speech has evolved since then, the key feature of the US Code is those involved intend or know "... information is to be used to the injury of the United States..." That the names of Afghan individuals who have been allies of the US were revealed, injuring US military and diplomatic mission there, is a fact. In the text of the US Code, the onus is put on those who released the information to prove they did not intend that.
As it now stands, the duty of the Attorney General is to seek indict Julian Assange and seek his extradition. Like so many other failure to uphold the law by the Obama Administration, the prospect of that happening, however, is unlikely.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2010/intell-100814-voa01.htm
Over 77,000 Afghans who have been helpful to their nation and ours have had their names revealed on the Net to al Qaida and the Taliban. Their information has put them in jeopardy and many of them will die for Assange's WikiTerrorism. Too bad those minimizing and justifying are not being subjected to the same dangers as they are as a learning experience. Even the Huffington Post had to look at this way:
The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International and three other groups have sent a series of e-mails to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange calling for the names of Afghan civilians to be removed from the 77,000 classified military documents published by the online whistle-blower last month.
"There was no consideration about civilian lives," Nadery said, noting a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators.
The Pentagon told Julain Assange his actions risk the lives of U.S. soldiers and Afghan citizens and could possibly undermine military operations against extremists in Afghanistan.
Members of the Taliban were studying the documents to retaliate against any informants cooperating with the U.S. military long before Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission spokesman Nadery said, "There was no consideration about civilian lives," after noticing a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators.
In Presidential Order 12958 it is clear Julian Assange is in violation in, Part 1. Original Classification, Sec. 1.1. Classification Standards that: (b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.(c) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 793 : US Code - Section 793: Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a ten year prison sentence and a $10,000 fine are the sanctions, "(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy."
Interfering with military operations and supporting America's enemies during wartime, promoting insubordination in the military, or interfering with with military recruitment are prohibited .
In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Schenck v. United States the act did not violate the free speech rights of those convicted under its provisions. While a great deal of caselaw on free speech has evolved since then, the key feature of the US Code is those involved intend or know "... information is to be used to the injury of the United States..." That the names of Afghan individuals who have been allies of the US were revealed, injuring US military and diplomatic mission there, is a fact. In the text of the US Code, the onus is put on those who released the information to prove they did not intend that.
As it now stands, the duty of the Attorney General is to seek indict Julian Assange and seek his extradition. Like so many other failure to uphold the law by the Obama Administration, the prospect of that happening, however, is unlikely.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2010/intell-100814-voa01.htm
Espionage, Assange, and Classified Documents
Assange forced the release of the names of Afghan civilians over the objections of the Pentagon, several human rights groups, and those working with him. That was one of the causes of the split with Wikileaks by major members of his staff. He had a deadline to meet with a magazine he gave exclusive rights to. From what is now being said, he has sanitized it afterwards.... too late for anything, except to cover his tracks.
There will be no new dimension in the release of classified documents. There will be a revetting those who handle classified documents, the increased compartmentalization of access, and the policies/laws regarding compromising those documents. It could be draconian, but it will be thorough.
There will be no new dimension in the release of classified documents. There will be a revetting those who handle classified documents, the increased compartmentalization of access, and the policies/laws regarding compromising those documents. It could be draconian, but it will be thorough.
Democracy Versus the Tyranny of Assange and Manning
DEMOCRACY: government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.We do not elect the agents to the Cabinet level of executive office. Little can be said that is good about elected officials, either:
Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt.-Patrick HenryIf issues were decided by the people, they would be done in referendum, initiatives, and recall votes.
However, when it comes to stealing US classified documents, no spy or "journalist" was elected to be our gatekeeper of that national treasure. When individuals decide to release critical information without authorization, it is rule by one - a tyranny. Neither Julian Assange nor Pfc. Bradley Manning had the right to sell, distribute, nor even possess our national secrets without our permission.
At this point, all proceeds from the sale of the property of the citizens of the US should be confiscated, regardless of who fenced our property.
ALL profits earned by Assange for selling the property of the US people, their secrets, should be confiscated. Any income from sales in the US through publishers or distributors should be confiscated. No criminal should be allowed to benefit from his crime
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)