PDA

View Full Version : The Stealing Of America By The Cops, The Courts, The Corporations And Congress



Ares
22nd July 2014, 08:58 PM
“What the government is good at is collecting taxes, taking away your freedoms and killing people. It’s not good at much else.” —Author Tom Clancy

Call it what you will—taxes, penalties, fees, fines, regulations, tariffs, tickets, permits, surcharges, tolls, asset forfeitures, foreclosures, etc.—but the only word that truly describes the constant bilking of the American taxpayer by the government and its corporate partners is theft.

We’re operating in a topsy-turvy Sherwood Forest where instead of Robin Hood and his merry band of thieves stealing from the rich to feed the poor, you’ve got the government and its merry band of corporate thieves stealing from the poor to fatten the wallets of the rich. In this way, the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. All the while, the American Dream of peace, prosperity, and liberty has turned into a nightmare of endless wars, debilitating debt, and outright tyranny.

What Americans don’t seem to comprehend is that if the government can arbitrarily take away your property, without your having much say about it, you have no true rights. You’re nothing more than a serf or a slave.

In this way, the police state with all of its trappings—from surveillance cameras, militarized police, SWAT team raids, truancy and zero tolerance policies, asset forfeiture laws, privatized prisons and red light cameras to Sting Ray guns, fusion centers, drones, black boxes, hollow-point bullets, detention centers, speed traps and abundance of laws criminalizing otherwise legitimate conduct—is little more than a front for a high-dollar covert operation aimed at laundering as much money as possible through government agencies and into the bank accounts of corporations.

The rationalizations for the American police state are many. There’s the so-called threat of terrorism, the ongoing Drug War, the influx of illegal immigrants, the threat of civil unrest in the face of economic collapse, etc. However, these rationalizations are merely excuses for the growth of a government behemoth, one which works hand in hand with corporations to profit from a society kept under lockdown and in fear at all times.

Indeed, as I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, the real motivating factor behind erecting a police state is not to protect the people, but to further enrich the powerful. Consider the following costly line items, all part of the government’s so-called quest to keep us safe and fight terrorism while entrenching the police state, enriching the elite, and further shredding our constitutional rights:

$4.2 billion for militarized police. Almost 13,000 agencies in all 50 states and four U.S. territories participate in a military “recycling” program which allows the Defense Department to transfer surplus military hardware to local and state police. In 2012 alone, $546 million worth of military equipment was distributed to law enforcement agencies throughout the country.



$34 billion for police departments to add to their arsenals of weapons and equipment. Since President Obama took office, police departments across the country “have received tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft.” While police departments like to frame the acquisition of military surplus as a money-saving method, in a twisted sort of double jeopardy, the taxpayer ends up footing a bigger bill. First, taxpayers are forced to pay millions of dollars for equipment which the Defense Department purchases from megacorporations only to abandon after a few years. Then taxpayers find themselves footing the bill to maintain the costly equipment once it has been acquired by the local police.



$6 billion in assets seized by the federal government in one year alone. Relying on the topsy-turvy legal theory that one’s property can not only be guilty of a crime but is also guilty until proven innocent, government agencies have eagerly cashed in on the civil asset forfeiture revenue scheme, which allows police to seize private property they “suspect” may be connected to criminal activity. Then whether or not any crime is actually proven to have taken place, the cops keeps the citizen’s property. Eighty percent of these asset forfeiture cases result in no charge against the property owner. Some states are actually considering expanding the use of asset forfeiture laws to include petty misdemeanors. This would mean that property could be seized in cases of minor crimes such as harassment, possession of small amounts of marijuana, and trespassing in a public park after dark.



$11,000 per hour for a SWAT team raid on a government dissident. The raid was carried out against Terry Porter, a Maryland resident who runs a welding business, is married with three kids, is outspoken about his views of the government, and has been labeled a prepper because he has an underground bunker and food supplies in case things turn apocalyptic. The raiding team included “150 Maryland State Police, FBI, State Fire Marshal’s bomb squad and County SWAT teams, complete with two police helicopters, two Bearcat ‘special response’ vehicles, mobile command posts, snipers, police dogs, bomb disposal truck, bomb sniffing robots and a huge excavator. They even brought in food trucks.”



$3.8 billion requested by the Obama administration to send more immigration judges to the southern border, build additional detention camps and add border patrol agents. Border Patrol agents are already allowed to search people’s homes, intimately probe their bodies, and rifle through their belongings, all without a warrant. As one journalist put it, “The surveillance apparatus is in your face. The high-powered cameras are pointed at you; the drones are above you; you’re stopped regularly at checkpoints and interrogated.” For example, an American citizen entering the U.S. from Mexico was subjected to a full-body cavity search in which she was subjected to a variety of invasive procedures, including an observed bowel movement and a CT scan, all because a drug dog jumped on her when she was going through border security. Physicians found no drugs hidden in her body.



$61 billion for the Department of Homeland Security, one of the most notoriously bloated government agencies ever created. The third largest federal agency behind the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense, the DHS—with its 240,000 full-time workers and sub-agencies—has been aptly dubbed a “runaway train.”



$80 billion spent on incarceration by the states and the federal government in 2010. While providing security, housing, food, medical care, etc., for six million Americans is a hardship for cash-strapped states, it’s a gold mine to profit-hungry corporations such as Corrections Corp of America and GEO Group, the leaders in the partnership corrections industry. Thus, with an eye toward increasing its bottom line, CCA has floated a proposal to prison officials in 48 states offering to buy and manage public prisons at a substantial cost savings to the states. In exchange, the prisons would have to contain at least 1,000 beds and states would have to maintain a 90% occupancy rate for at least 20 years. This has led to the phenomenon of overcriminalization of everyday activities, in which mundane activities such as growing vegetables in your yard or collecting rainwater on your property are criminalized, resulting in jail sentences for individuals who might otherwise have never seen the inside of a jail cell.



$6.4 billion a year for the Bureau of Prisons and $30,000 a year to house an inmate. There are over 3,000 people in America serving life sentences for non-violent crimes. These include theft of a jacket, siphoning gasoline from a truck, stealing tools, and attempting to cash a stolen check. Most of the non-violent offenses which triggered life sentences were drug crimes involving trace amounts of heroin and cocaine. One person imprisoned for life was merely a go-between for an undercover officer buying ten dollars’ worth of marijuana. California has more money devoted to its prison system than its system of education. State spending on incarceration is the fastest growing budget item besides Medicaid.



93 cents an hour for forced, prison labor in service to for-profit corporations such as Starbucks, Microsoft, Walmart, and Victoria’s Secret. What this forced labor scheme has created, indirectly or not, is a financial incentive for both the corporations and government agencies to keep the prisons full to capacity. A good portion of the 2 million prisoners in public facilities are forced to work for corporations, making products on the cheap, undermining free laborers, and increasing the bottom line for many of America’s most popular brands. “Prison labor reportedly produces 100 percent of military helmets, shirts, pants, tents, bags, canteens, and a variety of other equipment. Prison labor makes circuit boards for IBM, Texas Instruments, and Dell. Many McDonald's uniforms are sewn by inmates. Other corporations—Microsoft, Victoria's Secret, Boeing, Motorola, Compaq, Revlon, and Kmart—also benefit from prison labor.”



$2.6 million pocketed by Pennsylvania judges who were paid to jail youths and send them to private prison facilities. The judges, paid off by the Mid Atlantic Youth Service Corporation, which specializes in private prisons for juvenile offenders, had more than 5,000 kids come through their courtrooms and sent many of them to prison for petty crimes such as stealing DVDs from Wal-Mart and trespassing in vacant buildings.



$1.4 billion per year reportedly lost to truancy by California school districts, which receive government funding based on student attendance. The so-called “solution” to student absences from school has proven to be a financial windfall for cash-strapped schools, enabling them to rake in millions, fine parents up to $500 for each unexcused absence, with the potential for jail time, and has given rise to a whole new track in the criminal justice system devoted to creating new revenue streams for communities. For example, Eileen DiNino, a woman serving a two-day jail sentence for her children’s truancy violations, died while in custody. She is one of hundreds of people jailed in Pennsylvania over their inability to pay fines related to truancy, which include a variety of arbitrary fees meant to rack up money for the courts. For example, “[DiNino’s] bill included a laundry list of routine fees: $8 for a “judicial computer project”; $60 for Berks constables; $40 for “summary costs” for several court offices; and $10 for postage.” So even if one is charged with a $20 fine, they may end up finding themselves on the hook for $150 in court fees.



$84.9 million collected in one year by the District of Columbia as a result of tickets issued by speeding and traffic light cameras stationed around the city. Multiply that income hundreds of times over to account for the growing number of localities latching onto these revenue-generating, photo-enforced camera schemes, and you’ll understand why community governments and police agencies are lining up in droves to install them, despite reports of wide scale corruption by the companies operating the cameras. Although nine states have banned the cameras, they’re in 24 states already and rising.



$1.4 billion for fusion centers. These fusion centers, which represent the combined surveillance and intelligence efforts of federal, state and local law enforcement, have proven to be exercises in incompetence, often producing irrelevant, useless or inappropriate intelligence, while spending millions of dollars on “flat-screen televisions, sport utility vehicles, hidden cameras and other gadgets.”

In sum, the American police state is a multi-billion dollar boondoggle, meant to keep the property and the resources of the American people flowing into corrupt government agencies and their corporate partners. For those with any accounting ability, it’s clear that the total sum of the expenses being charged to the American taxpayer’s account by the government add up to only one thing: the loss of our freedoms. It’s time to seriously consider a plan to begin de-funding this beast and keeping our resources where they belong: in our communities, working for us.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-22/stealing-america-cops-courts-corporations-and-congress

Cebu_4_2
22nd July 2014, 09:15 PM
Solution? Avoid them all.

palani
23rd July 2014, 04:35 AM
Every service government provides is a benefit. Benefits are voluntary. You don't have to take them.

Being incarcerated is a benefit. Having your property taken is a benefit. Receiving social security, welfare, dialing 911, OSHA, EPA ... all benefits. These things are all consensual. Problem is you don't see the connection when you agree to consent what additional obligations are placed on you. Learn to negotiate better.

madfranks
23rd July 2014, 07:02 AM
Every service government provides is a benefit. Benefits are voluntary. You don't have to take them.

Being incarcerated is a benefit. Having your property taken is a benefit. Receiving social security, welfare, dialing 911, OSHA, EPA ... all benefits. These things are all consensual. Problem is you don't see the connection when you agree to consent what additional obligations are placed on you. Learn to negotiate better.

A valid implicit agreement (agreeing to be bound by government rules in return for government benefits) does not exist if one explicitly states they do not agree.

palani
23rd July 2014, 07:13 AM
A valid implicit agreement (agreeing to be bound by government rules in return for government benefits) does not exist if one explicitly states they do not agree.

View your actions critically.

Say you are standing in court expressing your non-agreement. Judge looks at you and says 'TAKE THAT TOOTHPICK OUT OF YOUR MOUTH OR I WILL HAVE THE BAILIFF REMOVE IT!' Surprised ... yes ... you reach up and remove the toothpick .. or it could be your hat. Your previous statements are now null and void. You accepted the authority of the court to tell you what to do.

Another instance ... Judge comes into court and bailiff sings out "ALL RISE" and you stand up with everyone else.

Another instance ... upon sentencing the judge announces "will the defendant please rise" and your attorney stands up so you decide you had best stand up too.

Each case ... you consent.

iOWNme
23rd July 2014, 07:33 AM
View your actions critically.

Say you are standing in court expressing your non-agreement. Judge looks at you and says 'TAKE THAT TOOTHPICK OUT OF YOUR MOUTH OR I WILL HAVE THE BAILIFF REMOVE IT!' Surprised ... yes ... you reach up and remove the toothpick .. or it could be your hat. Your previous statements are now null and void. You accepted the authority of the court to tell you what to do.

Another instance ... Judge comes into court and bailiff sings out "ALL RISE" and you stand up with everyone else.

Another instance ... upon sentencing the judge announces "will the defendant please rise" and your attorney stands up so you decide you had best stand up too.

Each case ... you consent.


You REALLY are the victim of mind control.

No matter what the case, you blame the individual for trying to STOP from being robbed or caged. As if the individual is the bad guy, because the 'Politicians' said so, not because he actually did anything wrong or immoral. You make me want to VOMIT.


If i resisted a car jacker, im the good guy. If i resist a home invader, im the good guy. If i resist a thief, im the good guy. If i resist a gang of violent criminals, im the good guy.

But the second i resist someone in 'Government', i instantly become the bad guy.


Everything you post are nothing but a parroted version of the words of your Master. You have spent countless hours in your life reading through the scribbles of your slave Master hoping to find your 'freedom' inside. Why do you ALWAYS blame the victims of State aggression? Its because you IMAGINE that you have some keen insight and that you understand how the system works, but everyone else is just an idiot.

It is a 100% contradiction to say that the only way to freedom is to do what your slave Master tells you. Not only is it a gigantic contradiction, it shows that you still dont even understand what Freedom even is.


-How about the cute girl who wears a short skirt to the bar, who ends up getting raped, did she 'consent' by wearing provacative clothing and smiling at a stranger?

-Or the Farmer who might have broken some arbitrary 'law' by simply trying to feed himself and his family? Is he to blame because he didnt read through 60,000 pages of 'Law'?

-What about the businessman who does something deemed 'illegal' by only trying to run his shop and feed his family? Is he the bad guy because he didnt spend his whole life reading through the scribbles of 'Politicians'?


Do you honestly IMAGINE that individual people have the moral obligation to know the 'law' and follow it to a 'T'?


And finally, here is the insanity of your position summed up:

Lets say your at home and you hear a knock on the door. You open it and it is a guy who is scared shitless and screaming for help. Once you calm him down, he explains to you that the gang the 'Crips' are after him for not paying them some money. He explains to you that the 'Crips' came into his neighborhood a couple months ago demanding money under threat of death. He tells you at first he payed the money to keep his family safe. But now he has changed his mind and has decided to not pay the criminal gang anymore, and wants your help resisting them.

In this scenario, are you going to tell the guy that he 'consented' by initially paying the money because he feared for his life? Or are you gong to recognize that the gang is illegitimate, and that this man has no moral obligation to pay them anything. Are you going to blame him for not understanding the 'Crips Law'? Are you going to shut the door in his face and tell him he consented to these criminals?

Im trying to find the principle behind your position. And once again, i find there is none.

iOWNme
23rd July 2014, 07:56 AM
A valid implicit agreement (agreeing to be bound by government rules in return for government benefits) does not exist if one explicitly states they do not agree.

I sent letters to the SS office, IRS, State reps, etc almost 10 years ago telling them i do not consent to anything they do. I asked them to remove my name from the voting reg, remove my name from the SS and IRS lists, etc. In a 'civilized' society, this would be considered me removing my consent. I only ever got back 1 letter, stating that my name was removed from the voter reg. LOL

But i guess palani will come tell me that i didnt fill out the papers correctly (according to the Master). Because palani doesnt use his moral compass, he only uses his 'Legal' compass. Which again is just repeating back what his Master tells him.

The moment something ceases to be voluntary, it becomes immoral. Now, WHO is the one to decide whether i consent to something? Is it the way i fill out paperwork? Is it the secret stamp i use to send it? Or is it my own free will and conscience that decides whether i am being coerced into something?

All that matters is that i do not consent anymore. It matters not if the method i used to remove my consent is inline with what the Masters say.

palani
23rd July 2014, 08:06 AM
I sent letters to the SS office, IRS, State reps, etc almost 10 years ago telling them i do not consent to anything they do. I asked them to remove my name from the voting reg, remove my name from the SS and IRS lists, etc. In a 'civilized' society, this would be considered me removing my consent. I only ever got back 1 letter, stating that my name was removed from the voter reg. LOL

So your ultimate complaint is that they didn't NOTIFY you that they agreed with you? Do you need confirmation? Their silence is their acquiescence. The failure is upon you that you did not request to have their responses sent to your notary assistant. And you failed to send your letters REGISTERED. And you did not ask for an affidavit from your notary assistant saying he received no responses. And you did not take the whole package down to the recorders office to have your notice and the others non-response recorded in an office whose whole purpose for being is to RECORD documents.

So now you bitch and complain because one has only your WORD with NO WITNESSES to the actions you have taken and they continue to send you letters as if you had done nothing? If you open these letters they you are acknowledging that you are the party they were sent to. If you agree that you have a SSN on any official forms then you do still have a connection to that SSN.

Did you honestly believe that a single action on your part was going to haul your sorry a$$ out of the system? Better plan on being alert for the rest of your life because that is what it is going to take.

palani
23rd July 2014, 08:09 AM
You REALLY are the victim of mind control.

If you are so successful then why are you ANGRY? I have come to grips with the system as it exists and see no reason to change it. You appear to be attempting to throw the entire system out and replace it with ... WHAT? A system where each man's consent means nothing?

BrewTech
23rd July 2014, 08:22 AM
So your ultimate complaint is that they didn't NOTIFY you that they agreed with you? Do you need confirmation? Their silence is their acquiescence. The failure is upon you that you did not request to have their responses sent to your notary assistant. And you failed to send your letters REGISTERED. And you did not ask for an affidavit from your notary assistant saying he received no responses. And you did not take the whole package down to the recorders office to have your notice and the others non-response recorded in an office whose whole purpose for being is to RECORD documents.

So now you bitch and complain because one has only your WORD with NO WITNESSES to the actions you have taken and they continue to send you letters as if you had done nothing? If you open these letters they you are acknowledging that you are the party they were sent to. If you agree that you have a SSN on any official forms then you do still have a connection to that SSN.

Did you honestly believe that a single action on your part was going to haul your sorry a$$ out of the system? Better plan on being alert for the rest of your life because that is what it is going to take.

Because he did not follow their regulations... he is in the wrong. You just proved his point again, palani.

palani
23rd July 2014, 08:27 AM
Because he did not follow their regulations... he is in the wrong. You just proved his point again, palani.

His only point is that his Yeas and Nays have no meaning. If this is what you are referring to then we are in agreement.

Also he is weak on procedure. Only out of the mouths of two or more witnesses are facts established.

BrewTech
23rd July 2014, 08:35 AM
His only point is that his Yeas and Nays have no meaning. If this is what you are referring to then we are in agreement.

Also he is weak on government- approved procedure. Only out of the mouths of two or more witnesses are facts established, according to the arbitrary rulemakers.

Isn't that what you meant?

Hatha Sunahara
23rd July 2014, 09:59 AM
Our relationship with government is an 'adhesion contract'.



Adhesion Contract A type of contract, a legally binding agreement between two parties to do a certain thing, in which one side has all the bargaining power and uses it to write the contract primarily to his or her advantage.
An example of an adhesion contract is a standardized contract form that offers goods or services to consumers on essentially a "take it or leave it" basis without giving consumers realistic opportunities to negotiate terms that would benefit their interests. When this occurs, the consumer cannot obtain the desired product or service unless he or she acquiesces to the form contract.
There is nothing unenforceable or even wrong about adhesion contracts. In fact, most businesses would never conclude their volume of transactions if it were necessary to negotiate all the terms of every Consumer Credit (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Consumer+Credit) contract. Insurance contracts and residential leases are other kinds of adhesion contracts. This does not mean, however, that all adhesion contracts are valid. Many adhesion contracts are Unconscionable (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Unconscionable); they are so unfair to the weaker party that a court will refuse to enforce them. An example would be severe penalty provisions for failure to pay loan installments promptly that are physically hidden by small print located in the middle of an obscure paragraph of a lengthy loan agreement. In such a case a court can find that there is no meeting of the minds of the parties to the contract and that the weaker party has not accepted the terms of the contrac


Hatha

palani
23rd July 2014, 10:30 AM
Our relationship with government is an 'adhesion contract'

The entire concept of contracts was 'restated' in 1938 by the American Law Institute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restatement_%28Second%29_of_Contracts

Libertarian_Guard
23rd July 2014, 09:29 PM
“What the government is good at is collecting taxes, taking away your freedoms and killing people. It’s not good at much else.” —Author Tom Clancy

Call it what you will—taxes, penalties, fees, fines, regulations, tariffs, tickets, permits, surcharges, tolls, asset forfeitures, foreclosures, etc.—but the only word that truly describes the constant bilking of the American taxpayer by the government and its corporate partners is theft.

We’re operating in a topsy-turvy Sherwood Forest where instead of Robin Hood and his merry band of thieves stealing from the rich to feed the poor, you’ve got the government and its merry band of corporate thieves stealing from the poor to fatten the wallets of the rich. In this way, the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. All the while, the American Dream of peace, prosperity, and liberty has turned into a nightmare of endless wars, debilitating debt, and outright tyranny.

What Americans don’t seem to comprehend is that if the government can arbitrarily take away your property, without your having much say about it, you have no true rights. You’re nothing more than a serf or a slave.

In this way, the police state with all of its trappings—from surveillance cameras, militarized police, SWAT team raids, truancy and zero tolerance policies, asset forfeiture laws, privatized prisons and red light cameras to Sting Ray guns, fusion centers, drones, black boxes, hollow-point bullets, detention centers, speed traps and abundance of laws criminalizing otherwise legitimate conduct—is little more than a front for a high-dollar covert operation aimed at laundering as much money as possible through government agencies and into the bank accounts of corporations.

The rationalizations for the American police state are many. There’s the so-called threat of terrorism, the ongoing Drug War, the influx of illegal immigrants, the threat of civil unrest in the face of economic collapse, etc. However, these rationalizations are merely excuses for the growth of a government behemoth, one which works hand in hand with corporations to profit from a society kept under lockdown and in fear at all times.

Indeed, as I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, the real motivating factor behind erecting a police state is not to protect the people, but to further enrich the powerful. Consider the following costly line items, all part of the government’s so-called quest to keep us safe and fight terrorism while entrenching the police state, enriching the elite, and further shredding our constitutional rights:

$4.2 billion for militarized police. Almost 13,000 agencies in all 50 states and four U.S. territories participate in a military “recycling” program which allows the Defense Department to transfer surplus military hardware to local and state police. In 2012 alone, $546 million worth of military equipment was distributed to law enforcement agencies throughout the country.



$34 billion for police departments to add to their arsenals of weapons and equipment. Since President Obama took office, police departments across the country “have received tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft.” While police departments like to frame the acquisition of military surplus as a money-saving method, in a twisted sort of double jeopardy, the taxpayer ends up footing a bigger bill. First, taxpayers are forced to pay millions of dollars for equipment which the Defense Department purchases from megacorporations only to abandon after a few years. Then taxpayers find themselves footing the bill to maintain the costly equipment once it has been acquired by the local police.



$6 billion in assets seized by the federal government in one year alone. Relying on the topsy-turvy legal theory that one’s property can not only be guilty of a crime but is also guilty until proven innocent, government agencies have eagerly cashed in on the civil asset forfeiture revenue scheme, which allows police to seize private property they “suspect” may be connected to criminal activity. Then whether or not any crime is actually proven to have taken place, the cops keeps the citizen’s property. Eighty percent of these asset forfeiture cases result in no charge against the property owner. Some states are actually considering expanding the use of asset forfeiture laws to include petty misdemeanors. This would mean that property could be seized in cases of minor crimes such as harassment, possession of small amounts of marijuana, and trespassing in a public park after dark.



$11,000 per hour for a SWAT team raid on a government dissident. The raid was carried out against Terry Porter, a Maryland resident who runs a welding business, is married with three kids, is outspoken about his views of the government, and has been labeled a prepper because he has an underground bunker and food supplies in case things turn apocalyptic. The raiding team included “150 Maryland State Police, FBI, State Fire Marshal’s bomb squad and County SWAT teams, complete with two police helicopters, two Bearcat ‘special response’ vehicles, mobile command posts, snipers, police dogs, bomb disposal truck, bomb sniffing robots and a huge excavator. They even brought in food trucks.”



$3.8 billion requested by the Obama administration to send more immigration judges to the southern border, build additional detention camps and add border patrol agents. Border Patrol agents are already allowed to search people’s homes, intimately probe their bodies, and rifle through their belongings, all without a warrant. As one journalist put it, “The surveillance apparatus is in your face. The high-powered cameras are pointed at you; the drones are above you; you’re stopped regularly at checkpoints and interrogated.” For example, an American citizen entering the U.S. from Mexico was subjected to a full-body cavity search in which she was subjected to a variety of invasive procedures, including an observed bowel movement and a CT scan, all because a drug dog jumped on her when she was going through border security. Physicians found no drugs hidden in her body.



$61 billion for the Department of Homeland Security, one of the most notoriously bloated government agencies ever created. The third largest federal agency behind the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense, the DHS—with its 240,000 full-time workers and sub-agencies—has been aptly dubbed a “runaway train.”



$80 billion spent on incarceration by the states and the federal government in 2010. While providing security, housing, food, medical care, etc., for six million Americans is a hardship for cash-strapped states, it’s a gold mine to profit-hungry corporations such as Corrections Corp of America and GEO Group, the leaders in the partnership corrections industry. Thus, with an eye toward increasing its bottom line, CCA has floated a proposal to prison officials in 48 states offering to buy and manage public prisons at a substantial cost savings to the states. In exchange, the prisons would have to contain at least 1,000 beds and states would have to maintain a 90% occupancy rate for at least 20 years. This has led to the phenomenon of overcriminalization of everyday activities, in which mundane activities such as growing vegetables in your yard or collecting rainwater on your property are criminalized, resulting in jail sentences for individuals who might otherwise have never seen the inside of a jail cell.



$6.4 billion a year for the Bureau of Prisons and $30,000 a year to house an inmate. There are over 3,000 people in America serving life sentences for non-violent crimes. These include theft of a jacket, siphoning gasoline from a truck, stealing tools, and attempting to cash a stolen check. Most of the non-violent offenses which triggered life sentences were drug crimes involving trace amounts of heroin and cocaine. One person imprisoned for life was merely a go-between for an undercover officer buying ten dollars’ worth of marijuana. California has more money devoted to its prison system than its system of education. State spending on incarceration is the fastest growing budget item besides Medicaid.



93 cents an hour for forced, prison labor in service to for-profit corporations such as Starbucks, Microsoft, Walmart, and Victoria’s Secret. What this forced labor scheme has created, indirectly or not, is a financial incentive for both the corporations and government agencies to keep the prisons full to capacity. A good portion of the 2 million prisoners in public facilities are forced to work for corporations, making products on the cheap, undermining free laborers, and increasing the bottom line for many of America’s most popular brands. “Prison labor reportedly produces 100 percent of military helmets, shirts, pants, tents, bags, canteens, and a variety of other equipment. Prison labor makes circuit boards for IBM, Texas Instruments, and Dell. Many McDonald's uniforms are sewn by inmates. Other corporations—Microsoft, Victoria's Secret, Boeing, Motorola, Compaq, Revlon, and Kmart—also benefit from prison labor.”



$2.6 million pocketed by Pennsylvania judges who were paid to jail youths and send them to private prison facilities. The judges, paid off by the Mid Atlantic Youth Service Corporation, which specializes in private prisons for juvenile offenders, had more than 5,000 kids come through their courtrooms and sent many of them to prison for petty crimes such as stealing DVDs from Wal-Mart and trespassing in vacant buildings.



$1.4 billion per year reportedly lost to truancy by California school districts, which receive government funding based on student attendance. The so-called “solution” to student absences from school has proven to be a financial windfall for cash-strapped schools, enabling them to rake in millions, fine parents up to $500 for each unexcused absence, with the potential for jail time, and has given rise to a whole new track in the criminal justice system devoted to creating new revenue streams for communities. For example, Eileen DiNino, a woman serving a two-day jail sentence for her children’s truancy violations, died while in custody. She is one of hundreds of people jailed in Pennsylvania over their inability to pay fines related to truancy, which include a variety of arbitrary fees meant to rack up money for the courts. For example, “[DiNino’s] bill included a laundry list of routine fees: $8 for a “judicial computer project”; $60 for Berks constables; $40 for “summary costs” for several court offices; and $10 for postage.” So even if one is charged with a $20 fine, they may end up finding themselves on the hook for $150 in court fees.



$84.9 million collected in one year by the District of Columbia as a result of tickets issued by speeding and traffic light cameras stationed around the city. Multiply that income hundreds of times over to account for the growing number of localities latching onto these revenue-generating, photo-enforced camera schemes, and you’ll understand why community governments and police agencies are lining up in droves to install them, despite reports of wide scale corruption by the companies operating the cameras. Although nine states have banned the cameras, they’re in 24 states already and rising.



$1.4 billion for fusion centers. These fusion centers, which represent the combined surveillance and intelligence efforts of federal, state and local law enforcement, have proven to be exercises in incompetence, often producing irrelevant, useless or inappropriate intelligence, while spending millions of dollars on “flat-screen televisions, sport utility vehicles, hidden cameras and other gadgets.”

In sum, the American police state is a multi-billion dollar boondoggle, meant to keep the property and the resources of the American people flowing into corrupt government agencies and their corporate partners. For those with any accounting ability, it’s clear that the total sum of the expenses being charged to the American taxpayer’s account by the government add up to only one thing: the loss of our freedoms. It’s time to seriously consider a plan to begin de-funding this beast and keeping our resources where they belong: in our communities, working for us.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-22/stealing-america-cops-courts-corporations-and-congress

Best post of the day.

Its the type of article that I would love to see in local News Papers, its a good starter to get people thinking and very well written.

madfranks
23rd July 2014, 09:45 PM
The entire concept of contracts was 'restated' in 1938 by the American Law Institute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restatement_%28Second%29_of_Contracts

How can there be a contract if one party explicitly states they do not agree? There is no such thing as an involuntary contract.

palani
24th July 2014, 06:11 AM
How can there be a contract if one party explicitly states they do not agree? There is no such thing as an involuntary contract.

From personal observation at a local tax lien auction

SHERIFF: "You take one step toward that door and I will arrest you."
PROTESTER: takes one step toward door
SHERIFF: "You are under arrest." followed by takedown, handcuffing and escort to lockup

madfranks
24th July 2014, 06:55 AM
From personal observation at a local tax lien auction

SHERIFF: "You take one step toward that door and I will arrest you."
PROTESTER: takes one step toward door
SHERIFF: "You are under arrest." followed by takedown, handcuffing and escort to lockup

That's not a contract, that's a threat.

iOWNme
24th July 2014, 07:11 AM
That's not a contract, that's a threat.

I guess if i call the 'Cops' for help to my house, and they show up, they have just agreed that i am their Master and that they should each pay me $1000 a month. They have each agreed to let me cage them for disobedience, and if they try and resist me, it will them who is in the wrong, and I will be justified in killing them.

LOL

palani
24th July 2014, 07:17 AM
That's not a contract, that's a threat.


Notice of intent to contract: "You take one step toward that door and I will arrest you."

Acceptance of contract: takes one step toward door

Performance of contract: "You are under arrest."

palani
24th July 2014, 07:18 AM
I guess if i call the 'Cops' for help to my house, and they show up, they have just agreed that i am their Master and that they should each pay me $1000 a month. They have each agreed to let me cage them for disobedience, and if they try and resist me, it will them who is in the wrong, and I will be justified in killing them.

LOL

Have you sent them notice of your terms?

iOWNme
24th July 2014, 09:18 AM
Notice of intent to contract: "You take one step toward that door and I will arrest you."

Acceptance of contract: takes one step toward door

Performance of contract: "You are under arrest."


If you actually IMAGINE the threats from criminals to be 'Law' and that disobedience to them is 'Accepting a contract' then YOU ARE THE VICTIM OF MIND CONTROL.

madfranks
24th July 2014, 09:44 AM
Notice of intent to contract: "You take one step toward that door and I will arrest you."

Acceptance of contract: takes one step toward door

Performance of contract: "You are under arrest."

and if I say "I don't agree" and take a step, what do you think would happen next?

palani
24th July 2014, 10:14 AM
YOU ARE THE VICTIM OF MIND CONTROL.
But not by YOU. Perhaps my mind is controlled by my own views?

palani
24th July 2014, 10:17 AM
and if I say "I don't agree" and take a step, what do you think would happen next?

Accepting the terms at the same time saying you aren't accepting? Which speaks louder? Actions or words? Either an action or a word will create a person.

If the door happens to be to the bathroom and you gotta go then why not just whip it out and pee on his shoe? As a form of counter-offer?