Category Archives: Road to Fascism

Home / Politics / Road to Fascism
164 Posts

Iran 1980-81, Khomeini and BaniSadr (the first president of the IRI), called for a cultural revolution, to ‘cleanse’ the society from those who were not true believes in the fundamentalist ideas of the regime. What followed was an unbelievable horror for the vast majority of secular Iranians. Many of them picked up a fight and died but many others left the country to an exile that lasted close to 40 years (and it is still going), the few who stayed had to pretend to be believers and obey the fanatic rules of the regime and turn a blind eye or in some cases even participate and support it’s crimes.

Last Night tRump called for authorization to start a similar actions in the US. To ‘cleanse’ the US government from unbelievers.
Will this be the end of the US democracy and turning US into a Christo-Fascist society?

“But Trump’s speech was also deeply dangerous for an even more important reason: Under the cover of his soothing rhetoric about unity and bipartisanship, Trump called on Congress to give him unprecedented and unquestionably antidemocratic powers: “Tonight,” he said, “I call on the congress to empower every Cabinet secretary with the authority to reward good workers—and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people.””

Donald Trump Just Asked Congress to End the Rule of Law
This should be the biggest headline of the speech.
Source: Donald Trump just asked Congress to end the rule of law.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I find this extremely humorous.
How many guys have not lied about their weight etc. when they date a person or even chat online? This is soooo ridiculous that makes me wonder if US is actually so safe that they have absolutely nothing else to go after than lying dudes or gals who are looking for a partner.

And this is from a country who’s leaders lied repeatedly in order to justify their illegal attack against Iraq. None of those guys EVER got in to trouble for trouble, it is FUCKED up isn’t it?
DOJ: Lying on Match.com needs to be a crime | Privacy Inc. – CNET News.

DOJ: Lying on Match.com needs to be a crime

by

The U.S. Department of Justice is defending computer hacking laws that make it a crime to use a fake name on Facebook or lie about your weight in an online dating profile at a site like Match.com.

In a statement obtained by CNET that’s scheduled to be delivered tomorrow, the Justice Department argues that it must be able to prosecute violations of Web sites’ often-ignored, always-unintelligible “terms of service” policies.

The law must allow “prosecutions based upon a violation of terms of service or similar contractual agreement with an employer or provider,” Richard Downing, the Justice Department’s deputy computer crime chief, will tell the U.S. Congress tomorrow.

Scaling back that law “would make it difficult or impossible to deter and address serious insider threats through prosecution,” and jeopardize prosecutions involving identity theft, misuse of government databases, and privacy invasions, according to Downing.

The law in question, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, has been used by the Justice Department to prosecute a woman, Lori Drew, who used a fake MySpace account to verbally attack a 13-year old girl who then committed suicide. Because MySpace’s terms of service prohibit impersonation, Drew was convicted of violating the CFAA. Her conviction was later thrown out.

What makes this possible is a section of the CFAA that was never intended to be used that way: a general-purpose prohibition on any computer-based act that “exceeds authorized access.” To the Justice Department, this means that a Web site’s terms of service define what’s “authorized” or not, and ignoring them can turn you into a felon.

On the other hand, because millions of Americans likely violate terms of service agreements every day, you’d have a lot of company.

A letter (PDF) sent to the Senate in August by a left-right coalition including the ACLU, Americans for Tax Reform, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and FreedomWorks warns of precisely that. “If a person assumes a fictitious identity at a party, there is no federal crime,” the letter says. “Yet if they assume that same identity on a social network that prohibits pseudonyms, there may again be a CFAA violation. This is a gross misuse of the law.”

Orin Kerr, a former Justice Department computer crime prosecutor who’s now a professor of law at George Washington University, says the government’s arguments are weak.

Kerr, who is also testifying tomorrow before a House Judiciary subcommittee, told CNET today that:

The Justice Department claims to have an interest in enforcing Terms of Use and computer use policies under the CFAA, but its examples mostly consist of cases in which the conduct described has already been criminalized by statutes other than the CFAA. Further, my proposed statutory fix (see the second proposal in my testimony) would preserve the government’s ability to prosecute the remaining cases DOJ mentions while not raising the civil liberties problems of the current statute.

Kerr’s testimony gives other examples of terms of service violations that would become criminal. Google says you can’t use its services if “you are not of legal age to form a binding contract,” which implies that millions of teenagers would be unindicted criminals. Match.com, meanwhile, says you can’t lie about your age, criminalizing the profile of anyone not a model of probity.

“I do not see any serious argument why such conduct should be criminal,” Kerr says.

The Justice Department disagrees. In fact, as part of a broader push to rewrite cybersecurity laws, the White House has proposed (PDF) broadening, not limiting, CFAA’s reach.

Stewart Baker, an attorney at Steptoe and Johnson who was previously a Homeland Security assistant secretary and general counsel at the National Security Agency, has suggested that the administration’s proposals to expand CFAA are Draconian. Uploading copyrighted YouTube videos twice “becomes a pattern of racketeering,” with even more severe criminal penalties, “at least if Justice gets its way,” Baker wrote.

In a kind of pre-emptive attack against Kerr’s proposed fixes, the Justice Department’s Downing says the CFAA properly criminalizes “improper” online activities.

“Businesses should have confidence that they can allow customers to access certain information on the business’s servers, such as information about their own orders and customer information, but that customers who intentionally exceed those limitations and obtain access to the business’s proprietary information and the information of other customers can be prosecuted,” Downing’s prepared remarks say.

Ok, I am feeling silly, but I find this funny!
In the US, it is OK to destroy property, burn media trucks, attack people, if you are demonstrating to support a man who hid the sexual abuse of one of his staff for so many years, but god forbid you demonstrate for your rights and want to make real changes in the society!

I can hear the chants of the crowd screaming, USA, USA, USA!

Penn State and Berkeley: A Tale of Two Protests

Student activists interlock arms as police in riot gear move in to clear a field of grass in front of Sproul Hall on the University of California at Berkeley campus Wednesday, November 9, 2011. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)

On Wednesday night, two proud universities saw student demonstrations that spiraled into violence. On the campus of Penn State University in State College Pennsylvania, several hundred students rioted in anger after the firing of legendary 84-year-old head football coach Joe Paterno. At the University of California at Berkeley, 1,000 students, part of the Occupy USA movement, attempted to maintain their protest encampment in the face of police orders to clear them out.

At Penn State, students overturned a media truck, hit an ESPN reporter in the head with a rock and made every effort at arson, attempting to set aflame the very heart of their campus. They raised their fists in defense of a man fired for allegedly covering up the actions of a revered assistant who doubled as a serial child rapist. The almost entirely male student mob was given the space by police to seethe and destroy without restraint.

At Berkeley, the police had a much different response. Defenseless students were struck repeatedly with batons, as efforts were made to disperse their occupation by Sproul Hall, the site of the famed Mario Savio–led free speech battles of the 1960s.

Two coasts and two riots: a frat riot and a cop riot. Each riot, an indelible mark of shame on their respective institutions.

The difference is that at Berkeley, the Occupiers—a diverse assemblage of students, linking arms—pushed back and displayed true courage in the face of state violence. They would not be moved. These students are a credit to their school and represent the absolute best of a young generation who are refusing to accept the world as it is.

At Penn State, we saw the worst of this generation: the flotsam and the fools; the dregs and the Droogs; young men of entitlement who rage for the machine.

No matter how many police officers raised their sticks, the students of Berkeley stood their ground, empowered by a deeper set of commitments to economic and social justice.

No matter how many children come forward to testify how Joe Paterno’s dear friend Jerry Sandusky brutally sodomized them on their very campus, the students at Penn State stood their ground. They stood committed to a man whose statue adorns their campus, whose salary exceeds $1.5 million and whose name for years was whispered to them like he was a benevolent Russian czar and they were the burgeoning Black Hundreds.

Theirs was a tragic statement that proud Penn State has become little more than a company town that’s been in the lucrative business of nursing Joe Paterno’s legend for far too long.

I spoke this morning to a student who was at Sproul Hall and another resident who was a bystander at State College. The word that peppered both of their accounts was “fear:” fear that those with the space and means to be violent—the police at Berkeley and the rioters at Penn State—would take it to, as Anne, a Berkeley student said to me, “a frightening point of no return.”

I would argue that this “point of no return” has now actually been reached, spurred by Wednesday night’s study in contrasts.

November 9 was a generational wake-up call to every student on every campus in this country. Which side are you on? Do you defend the ugliest manifestations of unchecked power or do you fight for a better world with an altogether different set of values? Do you stand with the Thugs of Penn State or do you stand with Occupiers of Berkeley? It’s fear vs. hope, and the stakes are a hell of a lot higher than a BCS bowl.

I remember when the green movement of Iran started, the whole world was condemning the Islamic Republic of Iran’s putting activists behind bars because they did exactly what these kids did in England.
And this is OK? Really? Do I smell double standards here?

UK police arrests 10 more over Facebook posts inciting riots | ZDNet

UK police arrests 10 more over Facebook posts inciting riots

By Emil Protalinski | August 11, 2011, 11:05am PDT

Summary: 10 more men have been arrested in connection with messages they posted on Facebook allegedly encouraging people to riot in the UK.

Scotland Yard vowed to track down and arrest protesters who posted “really inflammatory, inaccurate” messages on Facebook, but it didn’t stop at just two people. While two teenagers were arrested this week in connection with messages posted on Facebook allegedly encouraging people to start rioting, 10 more have now joined them, according to the BBC.

Two are from St Leonards-on-Sea. 27-year-old Nathan Sinden, who is alleged to have posted Facebook messages encouraging criminal damage and burglary, has been remanded in custody. Arrested on Wednesday, he appeared before Hastings Magistrates’ Court this morning. An 18-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of making threats to kill. He has been freed on police bail until August 22.

Two men from Lancashire have been charged after allegedly posting messages encouraging disorder on Facebook. 25-year-old Christopher Schofield and 19-year-old Warren Calvert have been charged with intentionally encouraging or assisting in the commission of an either way offence, believing it would be committed. Schofield was bailed to appear before Burnley Magistrates’ Court on August 15 and Calvert is due at Lancaster Magistrates’ Court on August 25.

Cheshire police say a 24-year-old man from Runcorn, a 22-year-old man from Warrington, and a 16-year-old boy from Macclesfield were also arrested on Wednesday and remanded in custody. The three will appear before magistrates today, accused of inciting public disorder through postings on Facebook and other social networks.

In Guernsey, three men were accused of misusing Facebook. They were charged and bailed for allegedly trying to use the social network to incite a riot, which is an offence under the island’s telecommunications law.