Attempt is made to arrest the Queen: Notification from the Sheriff’s Office of the Rome branch of The International Common Law Court of Justice (ICLCJ)

3 April, 2014, 6 pm GMT
Internal Communique
Rome and Brussels

Today, two duly appointed sheriffs of our Office attempted to enforce the standing Citizen Arrest Warrant (ICLCJ Court Order No. 02252013-004, Dated 4 March, 2013) against Elizabeth Windsor aka Queen Elizabeth II during her presence in Rome, and bring her into custody as a convicted felon and a fugitive from justice.

Their report is filed with our Office, and reads as follows:

“I, Domingo Santori, accompanied by Carlo Freschi, attempted to apprehend Elizabeth Windsor and place her under arrest as a convicted criminal, in accordance with the Brussels Court Order of March 4, 2013.

“At about 11:50 am today Rome time we approached the reported site of her meeting with President Napolitano at the Presidential Palace in Rome and discovered from a Palace official that the meeting had been moved to an undisclosed location. The lack of any security at the Palace that day seemed to confirm his statement. We then intended to apprehend Windsor later when she met with Pope Francis at the Domus Sanctae Marthae near to the Vatican. .

“Upon reaching the Domus at 1:05 pm, we were met by a sizable security force consisting of members of the National Police but no members of Vatican Security, which was highly unusual. It is our impression that the National Police knew of our intention and were waiting for us.

“We presented the Arrest Warrant to the Captain in charge of the National Police and informed him of our intent to enforce the Court Order and asked for his assistance in this legal procedure. The Captain would not agree to do so and refused to identify himself. He told us we would be placed under arrest if we tried to perform the arrest or “threaten the Pope” in any way. Several policemen then seized our video camera and roughly escorted us from the area. Our camera was not returned to us. We have lodged a formal complaint with the National Police.

“It is clear to us that the Italian government is actively colluding in protecting the convicted criminal Elizabeth Windsor. We recommend that greater force be employed by us in the future and that we rely on better intelligence on the movements of those to be arrested or served. We also ask the Court to issue a formal note of protest to the Italian government for its actions today and that the Court attempt to deputize local police forces to help us.

“On a final note of interest, we were told by one of the policemen at the Domus who assaulted us that ‘You guys are just wasting your time anyway, Il Papa (the Pope) isn’t even in there.’ We are not convinced that the alleged meetings between Elizabeth Windsor and the Pope and the President actually took place in the manner described in the world media. The absence of any Vatican Security at the Domus that day was noticeable and unusual, since it is considered Vatican property.

“We have also noted the cover story being circulated in the world media today that Pope Francis met with Elizabeth Windsor at the Vatican. We know this to be false and that their actual meeting occurred in an undisclosed location after they initially met at the Domus, which is the so-called ‘Pope’s’ private residence.”

Signed, D. Santori and counter signed by C. Freschi,
International Common Law Court Sheriffs, Rome Office of the Court
6 pm GMT
April 3, 2013

Issued by ITCCS Central and the International Common Law Court of Justice
www.iclcj.com    [This link does not work. I have tired it repeatedly. I did get in, however, to the site, - http://iclcj.com/?page_id=2 - and from what I see there, this statement is all that would be presented. Other sites are posting a rather mob-rule looking picture of the Queen, and I simply am not going to post it until I"m shown that iclcj is likely to have posted it themselves. We have enough problems on the planet without becoming a mob that goes after people. There are going to be plenty of situations arising like this, and I think it behooves us to keep the lid on this kind of behavior. ~J]

http://jhaines6.wordpress.com/2014/04/03/attempt-is-made-to-arrest-the-queen-notification-from-the-sheriffs-office-of-the-rome-branch-of-the-international-common-law-court-of-justice-iclcj/

2012 The Awakening

Attempt is made to arrest the Queen: Notification from the Sheriff’s Office of the Rome branch of The International Common Law Court of Justice (ICLCJ)

How to bypass the Supreme Court and fix campaign finance forever

If we want to lessen the influence of the rich, let’s make them less rich

Salon.com

How to bypass the Supreme Court and fix campaign finance forever

Dissent as Murder: Egyptian Court Sentences 529 Men to Death in One Ruling

At The Daily News Source, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by The Daily News Source and how it is used.

Log Files

Like many other Web sites, The Daily News Source makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons

The Daily News Source does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie

• Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on The Daily News Source.


• Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to The Daily News Source and other sites on the Internet.


• Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on The Daily News Source send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

The Daily News Source has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. The Daily News Source"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.

Dissent as Murder: Egyptian Court Sentences 529 Men to Death in One Ruling

Egyptian court sentences 529 Muslim Brotherhood members to death

An Egyptian court sentenced 529 members of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood to death for murder and other offences on Monday, in a sharp escalation of a crackdown on the movement that is likely to fuel instability.

Family members stood outside the courthouse screaming after the verdict — the biggest mass death sentence handed out in Egypt‘s modern history, defense lawyers said.

Turmoil has deepened since the army overthrew Egypt’s first freely elected president, Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, in July. Security forces have killed hundreds of Brotherhood members in the streets and arrested thousands.

Human rights groups said Monday’s verdict suggested the authorities intended to tighten their squeeze on the opposition.

State television reported the sentences without comment. A government spokesman and other government officials did not immediately respond to calls.

Most of the defendants at Monday’s hearing were detained and charged with carrying out attacks during clashes which erupted in the southern province of Minya after the forced dispersal of two Muslim Brotherhood protest camps in Cairo on August 14.

Islamist militants have also stepped up assaults on the police and army since Morsi’s ouster, killing hundreds and carrying out high profile operations against senior interior ministry officials.

“The court has decided to sentence to death 529 defendants, and 16 were acquitted,” defense lawyer Ahmed al-Sharif told Reuters. The condemned men can appeal against the ruling.

The Muslim Brotherhood, largely driven underground, responded by calling for the “downfall of military rule” on its official website.

Mohamed Mahsoub, who served as minister of legal affairs under Morsi, described the court’s decision “a ruling calling for the execution of justice” on his Facebook page.

Supporters set fire to a nearby school in protest, state television reported, though security officials said they had received no reports of unrest.

‘The quickest case’

The charges against the group, on trial in Minya since Saturday, include violence, inciting murder, storming a police station, attacking persons and damaging public and private property.

“This is the quickest case and the number sentenced to death is the largest in the history of the judiciary,” said lawyer Nabil Abdel Salam, who defends some Brotherhood leaders including Morsi.

“A second year student in the faculty of law would never issue this verdict. There are a lot of flaws in this verdict. I think maybe an appeal could be successful but nothing is predictable,” said Mohamed Zaree, program manager, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies.

HA Hellyer, an Egypt expert and fellow at American think-tank the Brookings Institution, said he doubted the sentences would be carried out.

“Nevertheless, the very issuing of the sentence itself is quite significant,” he added.

On Tuesday, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, Mohamed Badie, and 682 others will face trial on charges of incitement to kill.

Attacks

Only 123 of the defendants were in court. The rest were either released, out on bail or on the run.

“When the trial starts on Saturday and it is just a procedural hearing, and the judge doesn’t listen to any lawyers or witnesses and doesn’t even call the defendants, you are before a group of thugs and not the judiciary,” Walid, a relative of one of the defendants, said by phone.

It was not possible to confirm his account of the proceedings independently.

The government has declared the Brotherhood a “terrorist” group. The organization says it is committed to peaceful activism.

Analysts say some of its members could turn violent if the state keeps up pressure on the movement, which won the vast majority of elections since a popular uprising toppled autocrat Hosni Mubarak in 2011.

Egyptian authorities make no distinction between the Brotherhood and hardcore militant groups based in the Sinai peninsula who pose a major security challenge to the state despite army offensives against their fighters.

Morsi, Mubarak’s successor as president, and other top Brotherhood leaders are on trial on a range of charges and accuse the military of staging a coup and undermining democracy.

The army says it was acting on behalf of the Egyptian people, who took to the streets in their millions to call for Morsi’s resignation.

(Writing by Michael Georgy; Editing by Andrew Heavens)

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/egypt/140324/egyptian-court-sentences-529-muslim-brotherhood-membe

GlobalPost – Home

Egyptian court sentences 529 Muslim Brotherhood members to death

Arizona Supreme Court allows school choice program to stand

Arizona Supreme Court allows school choice program to stand
http://watchdog.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/09/JonathanButcher.jpg

By Mary Tillotson | Watchdog.org

Arizona’s highest court has effectively ruled in favor of the state’s innovative education savings account program, allowing hundreds of students access to a flexible, tailored education.

“This is really exciting news for families in Arizona,” said Jonathan Butcher, education director for the Goldwater Institute, which had intervened in the lawsuit on behalf of Arizona families.

Last fall, the state’s appeals court ruled in favor of the program, distinguishing it from a voucher program that was ruled unconstitutional in 2009. Opponents of the ESA program appealed, and the Supreme Court on Friday denied the appeal, allowing the lower court’s decision — and the program — to stand.

“What’s tremendous is that the appeals ruling was so strong,” Butcher said. “The language in there really confirmed everything that we said about education savings accounts from the beginning. We’ve made the case that they are distinct from vouchers and the provision in the law makes them unique, and parents are not compelled to spend their money on any one thing.”

When the state Supreme Court struck down the voucher program in 2009, it found legal footing in the state’s Blaine Amendment, which prohibits public funds from aiding private schools, whether or not they’re faith-based. Families using vouchers were required to spend voucher money on private schools.

Families using ESAs receive a limited-use debit card and permission to spend that money on private school tuition, textbooks, tutoring, education therapy and other educational expenses. The money rolls over year to year and can be saved for college.

When the appeals court upheld the ESA program, it noted that parents don’t have to spend the money on private school tuition — and therefore, the program doesn’t violate the state’s constitution.

“The specified object of the ESA is the beneficiary families, not private or sectarian schools,” the appeals court’s opinion stated. “Depending on how the parents choose to educate their children, this may or may not include paying tuition at a private school.”

Butcher said he hopes other states will take the court’s decision as a cue to enact their own ESA programs.

“The life cycle of school choice programs is almost predictable,” he said. “It gets passed in the law, the union sues, the court decides, and if they decide favorably, other states start doing it.”

About 700 students are currently using Arizona’s ESA program, and state lawmakers are considering several bills that would expand the program to allow more students to participate. Currently, students with special needs, children adopted from the state foster system, children assigned to failing schools and children of active-duty military families are eligible.

Several states have considered enacting ESA programs, but so far none has passed.

1. Arizona mom won’t give up on special needs kids, no matter what state says


2. Reviving a 1970s lawsuit, DOJ would keep black students in failing schools


3. Relocating sexually abusive teachers would be more difficult under Pennsylvania bill


4. DOJ backpedals on Louisiana voucher lawsuit


5. Court says charter schools won’t pay for Atlanta’s pension debts


6. Biggest education impact from shutdown? Furloughed bureaucrats


7. Appeals court upholds Arizona school choice program


8. Indiana’s voucher program expands; diversity a factor in one family’s choice of school


9. ‘Vouchers don’t do much good for students’ claim is false


10. NYC mayor’s race could affect school choice


11. Vermont public school goes independent, raises ire from state bureaucracy


12. Arizona education savings accounts aren’t vouchers, study says


13. Legal institute fights Alabama union’s attempt to repeal school tax credit


14. Experts: School choice improves education in public schools


15. SC school-choice program helps special needs kids, could expand


16. DOJ wants Louisiana parents out of voucher lawsuit


17. U.S. House passes bill to prevent ‘passing the trash’


18. ‘Non-traditional’ journalists barred from viewing tax-funded test results early


19. New center hopes to help charter schools help kids with special needs


20. Charter school advocate to Philadelphia schools: Listen to parents


21. $ 45 million not enough for Philadelphia teachers’ union


22. Study: Rhode Islanders support school choice


23. Study: Choice would help failing Chicago schools


24. Scholarships could lift SC school dedicated to real-life, hands-on learning


25. Parents make good school choices, study says


26. Divisive charter school reform bill headed toward vote in PA


27. In Louisiana school voucher lawsuit, DOJ changes gears


28. Opponents sue Washington to overturn charter school law


29. School choice proponents’ challenge? Educating parents


30. Judge: Federal oversight may not hamper school voucher program


31. PA lawmakers push to amend tight teacher furlough policies


32. College ready: A Milwaukee inner-city school success story


33. Proposed economic furloughs could slay sacred cow of seniority in Pennsylvania schools


34. What is Massachusetts doing right?


35. Goldwater to appeal Louisiana school voucher decision


36. Want to end poverty? Educate the kids


37. Breakdown in Philly schools not only about the money


38. North Carolina scholarship program on firm legal footing, attorney argues


39. Philadelphia school district threatens charters


40. Belief in student ability key to success at Milwaukee charter school


41. Three things to know about Philadelphia’s school budget: Debt, pensions and safety


42. Choosing to sue: Here’s a look at some 2013 lawsuits involving school choice


43. Philly charter schools outperform district counterparts


44. California students sue state over ineffective teachers


45. Study: Public supports parent choice in education


46. Under new management, Philly Renaissance Schools show growth


47. New Orleans tops school choice index


48. AZ to consider four school-choice expansion bills


49. Florida family ‘blessed’ to be apart of scholarship program


50. PA lawmakers put education at top of agenda in election year


51. Louisiana: Feds ‘more interested in skin color than … education’


52. Charter school for Philadelphia foster children will not be renewed


53. Governor ties proposed PA education funding to targeted grants


54. Vermont attempts to take independence from independent schools


55. WA’s first charter school serves children, families of ‘extreme poverty’


56. Philly stumbles on way to simplifying enrollment system


57. Plan for Philly schools keeps charters in check


58. Missouri ballot initiative would increase funding for public, private schools


59. New York charter school focuses on family, community


60. NC school vouchers on hold


61. WI voucher bill would help special needs students denied open enrollment


62. Philadelphia schools will end another year in red


63. PA universities expect state, students to pick up tab on rising tuition


64. Two ESA bills get House support in AZ


65. Thousands rally to support New York charter schools


66. California’s defense begins in Vergara trial


67. Accountability or overregulation? Charter supporters split over Minnesota bill


68. PA considers empowering universities to authorize charter schools


69. Bill would make Florida students eligible for scholarships


70. To test or not to test? Florida school choice proponents split


71. Philly school district broke, but the pay is good


72. Philadelphia charter school sues public school district


73. Colorado Supreme Court to hear school voucher case


74. Vermont to reconsider education funding formula


75. Arizona Supreme Court allows school choice program to stand

Please, feel free to “steal our stuff”! Just remember to credit Watchdog.org. Find out more

Watchdog.org

Read more about Arizona Supreme Court allows school choice program to stand and other interesting subjects concerning NSA at TheDailyNewsReport.com

The Supreme Court Has Just Given The Police Another Way To Search Your House Without A Warrant

The Supreme Court handed down a decision that effectively grants law enforcement and investigative agencies the power to search your home without a warrant.

Latest from Crooks and Liars

The Supreme Court Has Just Given The Police Another Way To Search Your House Without A Warrant

RARE VIDEO OF SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS FROM SMUGGLED CAMS SURFACES...

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.

Log Files

Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons

Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie

• Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.


• Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.


• Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.

RARE VIDEO OF SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS FROM SMUGGLED CAMS SURFACES...

Jeffrey Toobin - Supreme Court Afraid of The Daily Show w/ Jon Stewart - CNN - 2-24-14

Jeffrey Toobin - Supreme Court Afraid of The Daily Show w/ Jon Stewart - CNN - 2-24-14
http://img.youtube.com/vi/cOnkHaqjkfY/0.jpg

Read more about Jeffrey Toobin - Supreme Court Afraid of The Daily Show w/ Jon Stewart - CNN - 2-24-14 and other interesting subjects concerning Top News Videos at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Second Amendment Cases

Cases concern the right to carry concealed handguns outside the home

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
February 24, 2014

Three cases involving Second Amendment issues were turned away from the Supreme Court on Monday. The cases concerned the right of Americans to carry firearms outside their homes for self-defense.

The Court did not comment on petitions for certiorari for NRA v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, NRA v. McCraw and Lane v. Holder.

Constitution Daily reports the cases were considered on Friday in private conference.

A fourth case, however, may ultimately be considered by the Court and settle the matter. Drake v. Jerejian addresses gun control in New Jersey. The case argues that the Second Amendment permits a resident of the state to carry a firearm outside the home without providing justification to the state. A number of amici curiae briefs were filed with the Court on February 12.

The Court is set to respond by March 14, according to the SCOTUSBlog.

The Court has not ruled on the Second Amendment since 2010 when it issued a decision on McDonald v. City of Chicago. The case added to the 2008 Heller decision. Heller held in a 5-4 decision the Second Amendment applies to the District of Columbia and protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for self-defense. It struck down a DC law outlawing the possession of handguns in the home.

The decision follows a ruling issued last week by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that overturned a prohibition on carrying concealed handguns. The Court ruled that carrying a handgun “outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense, though subject to traditional restrictions, constitutes ‘bear[ing] Arms’ within the meaning of the Second Amendment.”

Rulings on carrying firearms outside of the home have been mixed. The 7th Circuit concurred with the 9th Circuit that carrying a gun in public is covered under the Second Amendment. Other courts, however, including the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Circuits, have issued less definitive opinions.

Earlier this month, the 9th Circuit struck down a California law restricting the carrying of a concealed weapon in the state. A majority ruled that restriction on carrying firearms in Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego and San Francisco violate the Second Amendment.

This article was posted: Monday, February 24, 2014 at 10:48 am

---

---

  Print this page.

---

---

Infowars

Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Second Amendment Cases

Critics accuse Obama of being too quick to court Myanmar"s brutal generals

WASHINGTON, DC — When US forces tested their jungle warfare skills in last year’s Cobra Gold exercise in Asia, two officers from Myanmar got privileged access, attending as observers.

That’s one example of cooperation that would have been unthinkable a few years ago — when the US still knew Myanmar as Burma — and which remains controversial today.

Critics contend that the administration of President Barack Obama has been too quick to embrace Myanmar’s military since the country initiated reforms, overlooking its dubious international allies and its lamentable reputation for violence against civilians and minority groups. In addition to launching military cooperation, the Obama administration has eased sanctions and other restrictions.

Dominated by generals, Myanmar’s government has long ranked among the world’s most oppressive and corrupt. It maintains close ties to China and North Korea. The latter link may have aided Burmese nuclear weapon and missile efforts.

In an October letter, more than 100 organizations representing ethnic minorities wrote that their members have endured “decades of oppression and persecution” under military rule in Myanmar. “They have destroyed our villages, stolen our land, forced us to serve as their slave labor, to carry their equipment as they hunt down, torture, kill, and enslave our fellow ethnic brothers and sisters, and rape, gang-rape, and sexually assault our women and girls,” the groups wrote.

But after decades of military rule, in 2011 the country began reforming and opening up.

Under the new order, officials have released the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners. The government is now ostensibly civilian, although the military still plays a prominent — arguably dominant — role.

While few doubt that Myanmar is moving in the right direction, there’s growing debate over just how quickly the US should be embracing this still-troubled country. Critics, including prominent members of Congress, want to slow engagement with Burma’s military. They want to require Myanmar to take specific steps before the US grants further military engagement.

A key question is whether Myamar will allow Aung San Suu Kyi to run for the presidency in elections slated for 2015. Her candidacy would require changes to the constitution written by the junta that held her under house arrest for years. A report released last Friday signaled an apparent reluctance to do so, according to the Wall Street Journal.

In defense of the administration, Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary Vikram Singh told a House subcommittee that its steps with the Myanmar military are “largely symbolic.”

In addition to allowing observers at the Cobra Gold exercise, they include participation in a bilateral human rights dialogue; resumption of accounting operations for missing US World War II personnel; and academic exchanges and workshops on subjects such as civilian military control, rule of law and the military’s role in humanitarian assistance.

The Obama administration sees this effort as aiding Myanmar’s liberalization. Judith Cefkin, the State Department’s senior advisor for Myanmar, said “military-to-military engagement to share lessons on how militaries operate in a democratic framework will strengthen the hand of reformers.” 

The administration stresses that further defense relations will depend on Myanmar’s progress liberalizing and suspending relations with North Korea, but the administration does not want to tie expansion to specific Burmese actions.

As a senior State Department official told GlobalPost, the idea is to “get away from a rigid quid pro quo.”

That is the crux of the dispute.

There is general agreement that US involvement with Myanmar’s military could speed reform and help wean the country from North Korea and China.

Jennifer Quigley of the US Campaign for Burma told an October Heritage Foundation session that the administration is “rapidly developing this military-to-military relationship without really taking into consideration the types of consequences that this will have for people on the ground,” such as ethnic minorities being attacked by the military.

In their October letter, the 133 groups representing ethnic minorities urged, as a precondition for further engagement, that Myanmar end attacks throughout the country, acknowledge past and present human rights abuses, and end economic activity by the military, among other things.

“Allowing military engagement with the Burmese military without requiring the Burmese military to demonstrate an interest in reform and to adhere with our preconditions conveys an undeserved legitimacy on the Burmese military and will jeopardize our efforts to persuade the Burmese military to agree to national reconciliation,” they wrote.

Keith Luse, a respected former Senate staffer, expressing his personal opinions at the Heritage session, acknowledged the need to deal with Myanmar’s military, but called for military relations with Myanmar to be contingent on “measurable reform benchmarks,” including human rights improvements and termination of Burma’s North Korea military relationship.

Legislation to put conditions on further military engagement has been introduced in the Senate and House. Senate sponsors include Marco Rubio, Bob Menendez, Ben Cardin and Bob Corker, the top Democrats and Republicans on the Foreign Relations Committee and its Asia subcommittee. The bill was introduced in the House by Steve Chabot, the Republican chairman of the Foreign Affairs Asia subcommittee, and Democrat Joseph Crowley.

The bill would bar military aid to Myanmar other than basic training on human rights and civilian control of the military. It would lift the prohibition only if Burma acts to measurably improve human rights conditions, including establishing civilian oversight of its military, addressing human rights violations by the military and terminating military relations with North Korea. The bill would request an annual report on the administration’s strategy to engage Myanmar’s military.

“I think there’s been far too much carrot and far too little stick,” Chabot said.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/140123/US-Myanmar-military-ties-human-rights-abuses

GlobalPost – Home

Critics accuse Obama of being too quick to court Myanmar"s brutal generals

Court rejects 4th attempt to detain Chang Teh-cheng

By Katherine Wei, The China Post
February 2, 2014, 12:46 am TWN

TAIPEI, Taiwan — The Taipei District Court (TDC) once again ordered that truck driver Chang Teh-cheng (張德正) be released on bail, this time at NT$ 300,000, after a wild drive through the gates of the Presidential Office.

After the TDC ruled for Chang to be released on bail of NT$ 150,000 on Friday and confined to his residence in Taipei, the Taiwan High Court rejected the decision on Friday night.

The gravel truck driver on Saturday drove a load of rubble — originally meant for a construction site in Keelung — into the Presidential Office, injuring only himself.

Before undertaking his plan, Chang had written a letter to a local TV station indicating that he was ready for any consequence following his actions, calling for the death sentence if he caused any deaths and a life sentence if there were none.

Chang’s lawyer, surnamed Yu, stressed that it would be impossible for Chang to commit similar crimes ever again. The injured driver was remanded to the custody of three lawyers on Thursday and was released without bail; the prosecution filed an appeal for Chang to be detained three times, and three times the request was rejected.

Yu accused the Taiwan High Court of ignoring Chang’s fragile physical condition, believing only the prosecution’s reports and disregarding the fact that he was sent to and from the court numerous times via an ambulance. “If Chang is sent to the detention center now, it would be risking his very life as the centers are not equipped with ample medical resources,” said Yu. “I feel sending Chang to detention would be going against the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as it would constitute inhumane treatment.”

The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office filed an appeal early on Thursday morning after the court ordered Chang’s release for the first time on Wednesday night; the High Court simply sent the request for detention to the TDC without a ruling. The TDC then decided against the need to detain Chang as it would be highly unlikely for him to attempt an escape.

The prosecution will be filing for another appeal due to the belief that Chang, despite his injuries, is still capable of causing harm of a similar degree.

This is the first case in which a defendant has been brought to court four times just to determine whether he should be detained.

NEXT ARTICLE
3 million vehicles hit freeways on the second day of CNY

	Truck driver Chang Teh-cheng (張德正) is wheeled into an elevator at the Taipei District Court, yesterday. Chang was summoned to court for the fourth time yesterday after he was released on bail on Friday, as the Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office deemed that Chang may commit similar crimes if he is released. (CNA) Enlarge Photo

China Post Online – Taiwan , News , Taiwan newspaper

Court rejects 4th attempt to detain Chang Teh-cheng

Harris v. Quinn: A Mother Petitions the Supreme Court in Fight Against Parasitic Unions

I have tried to steer clear of inflaming names like “parasite” when speaking about public unions. In this case, no other word comes close to describing the setup.

Making Millions Off the Disabled

One brave mother, Pam Harris, has resisted forced unionization of herself (as a sole home-caretaker, in her own home, for her disabled son Josh). She resisted all the way to the Supreme Court.

An email from Diana Rickert at Illinois Policy Institute describes the setup. You can also find her article on the Chicago Tribune.

With immense disgust, I present Making Millions Off the Disabled

Josh, the youngest child in the Harris family, was born with a rare genetic disorder. He lives with severe physical, cognitive and emotional struggles. This means the day-to-day tasks most of us take for granted — waking up, splashing water on his face, eating — require a lot of help.

But Josh is blessed to have a family that loves him. They always have been there for him.

In fact, his mother, Pam, has stayed home full time to take care of Josh for the past 25 years. Josh is her primary focus. Not her career. Not vacations. Not social outings with other moms. The truth is, Pam is doing what any mom would do: fighting to give her son the very best care she can.

Josh’s care is expensive. The Harris family is fortunate enough to receive a modest Medicaid benefit administered by Illinois state government. Josh is eligible to receive up to $ 2,130 per month, or roughly $ 25,000 a year.

But here is where the Harris family’s story takes a disgusting turn.

Henry Bayer wants some of Josh’s money. In fact, he feels entitled to it.

Who is Henry Bayer?

Bayer is the executive director of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31, one of the state’s largest government unions.

Bayer’s salary — approximately $ 145,000 in 2012, according to public records — is paid for by union dues from government workers. Compulsory union dues, from government workers who must pay money to Bayer and his union whether they want to or not.

Illinois politicians have a dangerously cozy relationship with government unions. In 2009, these close ties paid off: Gov. Pat Quinn issued an executive order to unionize the people in Josh’s program.

Imagine having to pay union dues to collect food stamps or unemployment. That’s what the executive order meant for Josh. For him to continue receiving his Medicaid support and his mother to be his primary caretaker, the Harris family would be forced to give part of their benefit check to either the AFSCME or another union, the Service Employees International Union.

The Harris family wouldn’t stand for it. They alerted other families in the program, and when it came time to vote on which union would represent them, the vote was clear: 220 votes for AFSCME, 293 votes for SEIU, and 1,018 votes with an emphatic “no union!”

Pam Harris and others took their fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Oral arguments in Josh’s case were heard Jan. 21, and a decision is expected this summer. Josh’s story has garnered national attention.

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court hearing, here is what AFSCME’s Bayer had to say in response to a Chicago Tribune editorial in favor of Pam Harris: If you don’t want to pay union dues, you shouldn’t be eligible for state aid.

A few years before the executive order to unionize the program that the Harris family participates in, Quinn’s predecessor, former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, unionized another, similar program for the disabled. The unions didn’t even bother taking a vote that time; they conducted a questionable card-check operation to claim a slim majority of people in this program wanted to pay dues to SEIU.

According to documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, since 2009 the SEIU has siphoned more than $ 52 million in union dues from the families in this program.

Pam Harris Video

Here is an interesting video by Pam Harris.

Forced Association

The Illinois Policy Institute was overly polite.

Pam Harris and others are forced against their will to join unions. Those unions do absolutely nothing for Harris except suck like giant parasites, money that should go to the disabled.

It would be fitting if the Supreme Court ruled the SEIU and AFSCME parasites not only have to stop the practice, but also have to pay back the $ 52 million they stole, plus interest.

These disgusting, parasitic practices occur in many other states as well.

Freedom of Association

I am all in favor of freedom of association. People who want to join the Boy Scouts can. People who want to join the NRA can. People who want to form any kind of work union can. I am happy to let those unions exist.

However, the reverse should be true as well. No one should be forced into an association (or forced into dealing with associations) if they don’t want to.

Imagine the outrage if liberals were forced to join the NRA to get jobs as teachers! 

Yet, somehow it’s OK if conservatives have to join the SEIU to take certain jobs. In the case of Harris and other caretakers, the jobs don’t even exist, except for the parasitic collection of union dues!

Forced membership into organizations is nothing more than a form of slavery. And “collective bargaining” is a euphemism for the slavery of forced membership.

Yes, it is indeed that simple, no matter how nice the union slave-masters try to make it sound.

I propose, and hope, that the Supreme Court issues a broad ruling on the matter, ending the slavery of forced collective bargaining once and for all.

Mike “Mish” Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Mike “Mish” Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis

Harris v. Quinn: A Mother Petitions the Supreme Court in Fight Against Parasitic Unions

US supreme court justices appear skeptical of abortion clinic buffer zones

Dan Roberts
theguardian.com
January 15, 2014

US supreme court justices appear sceptical of abortion clinic buffer zones

Court’s conservatives may be ready to strike down Massachusetts abortion clinic buffer zone law on free speech grounds

The battle lines of America’s culture wars threatened to draw closer on Wednesday, as the supreme court questioned the constitutionality of buffer zones designed to keep pro-life activists away from abortion clinics.

Though a final decision will not be reached for several months, a narrow majority of justices on the court, which is dominated by a conservative bloc, appeared sympathetic to free speech arguments against at least parts of the Massachusetts law.

“The government doesn’t get to decide what is said on the public pavement,” said Mark Rienzi, the lawyer representing the pro-life activists who brought the case.

Read more

This article was posted: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 at 2:51 pm

---

---

  Print this page.

---

---

Infowars

US supreme court justices appear skeptical of abortion clinic buffer zones

Court Strikes Big Blow to Net Neutrality

(Newser) – A federal court has rejected FCC Open Internet regulations to ensure Internet service providers can’t discriminate when it comes to web traffic. In Verizon v. FCC, the Washington, DC, court found that ISPs can legally prioritize or block some traffic, the Washington Post reports. The court did, however, rule that providers have to tell users when they’re doing so, the Verge notes. ISPs, according to the court, aren’t “common carriers” like older telecom firms—so they’re not subject to rules against prioritizing information.

“Given that the Commission has chosen to classify broadband providers in a manner that exempts them from treatment as common carriers,” law “expressly prohibits the Commission from nonetheless regulating them as such,” judge David Tatel wrote in the court opinion. The FCC “made a grave mistake when it failed to ground its Open Internet rules on solid legal footing,” says a net neutrality activist. “Internet users will pay dearly for the previous chairman’s lack of political will.” The commission says it will consider an appeal. In the meantime, Ars Technica sees net neutrality as “half-dead.”

Politics from Newser

Court Strikes Big Blow to Net Neutrality

Court Weighs F. Lee Bailey"s Bid to Practice Law in Maine

An appeal that seeks to deny famed attorney F. Lee Bailey’s application to practice law in Maine will be heard Tuesday in the State’s Supreme Judicial Court, the Portland Press Herald reports.

Last year, a judge on the panel ruled that Bailey could regain the right to practice but still owed taxes of nearly $ 2 million.

The full court will now weigh arguments on an appeal by the Maine Board of Bar Examiners that would block Bailey’s bid to hang a shingle in Maine.

Bailey, whose clients have included O.J. Simpson, Patty Hearst, Sam Sheppard and “Boston Strangler” Albert DeSalvo, was disbarred in Florida in 2001 and Massachusetts in 2003 for his alleged mishandling of a client’s stock.

He later passed the Maine state bar exam but in 2012 the Board of Bar Examiners denied his admission, saying it was not convinced he had “the requisite good character and fitness necessary” to practice.

Last year, Bailey, now a Maine resident, told the Press Herald, “I was pretty disappointed about the practice of law until I got up here. All these lawyers are all honest people and practice without any dirty tricks.”

Related Stories:

• Boston Strangler: Evidence Confirms DNA of DeSalvo Found on Victim

• F. Lee Bailey Writes Document Defending Simpson

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Newsmax – America

Court Weighs F. Lee Bailey"s Bid to Practice Law in Maine

US spy court: NSA to keep collecting phone records

Yahoo News – by STEPHEN BRAUN and KIMBERLY DOZIER

WASHINGTON (AP) — A secretive U.S. spy court has ruled again that the National Security Agency can keep collecting every American’s telephone records every day, in the midst of dueling decisions in two other federal courts about whether the surveillance program is constitutional.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on Friday renewed the NSA phone collection program, said Shawn Turner, a spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Such periodic requests are somewhat formulaic but required since the program started in 2006.  

The latest approval was the first since two conflicting court decisions about whether the program is lawful and since a presidential advisory panel recommended that the NSA no longer be allowed to collect and store the phone records and search them without obtaining separate court approval for each search.

In a statement, Turner said that 15 judges on the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on 36 occasions over the past seven years have approved the NSA’s collection of U.S. phone records as lawful.

Also Friday, government lawyers turned to U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to block one federal judge’s decision that threatens the NSA phone records program.

The opposing lawyer who spearheaded the effort that led to the ruling said he hopes to take the issue directly to the Supreme Court.

The Justice Department filed a one-page notice of appeal asking the appeals court to overturn U.S. District Judge Richard Leon’s ruling last month that the program was likely unconstitutional. The government’s move had been expected.

Larry Klayman, who filed the class-action suit against President Barack Obama and top administration national security officials, said he intends to petition the federal appeals court next week to send the case directly to the Supreme Court. Klayman said the move was justified because the NSA case was a matter of great public importance.

“There are exigent circumstances here,” Klayman said. “We can’t allow this situation to continue. The NSA’s continuing to spy on everybody.”

Turner said U.S. intelligence agencies would be willing to modify the phone records surveillance program to provide additional privacy and civil liberties protections as long as it was still operationally beneficial. He said the Obama administration was carefully evaluating the advisory panel’s recent recommendations.

Judges sitting on the secretive spy court have repeatedly approved the program for 90-day periods. They also have repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of the program — a judicial bulwark that held strong until Leon’s surprise decision last month.

Leon said the NSA’s program was “almost Orwellian,” a reference to writer George Orwell’s futuristic novel “1984,” and that there was little evidence the operation had prevented terrorist attacks. He ruled against the government but agreed to postpone shutting down the program until the government could appeal.

In a separate case involving the same NSA phone records program, a district judge in New York last month upheld the government’s data collection as lawful. The American Civil Liberties Union, which lost that case, said this week it will appeal to a federal appeals court in New York.

http://news.yahoo.com/us-spy-court-nsa-keep-collecting-phone-records-214801109–finance.html

US spy court: NSA to keep collecting phone records

Public Advocate Likely to Join Secret Spy Court

(Newser) – President Obama will lay out changes to the nation’s surveillance practices later this month, and the Los Angeles Times reports that it’s likely he will accept a key recommendation from a presidential panel on the topic: He will appoint what amounts to a public advocate to argue against the government’s requests before the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. As it stands now, the court hears only from government lawyers seeking additional surveillance power, and those requests get approved nearly 100% of the time. The public advocate will theoretically act as a check on that. Unclear is whether Obama will change how the court’s judges are picked; all are currently appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, and the panel recommended opening that up to other justices.

The LAT story also thinks that the president will “probably” shift control of the NSA’s massive database of telephone data from the government into private hands, perhaps the telephone companies themselves. The government could get access to it only with a judge’s permission. One change that looks unlikely: a proposal to make it more difficult for the FBI to issue so-called “national security letters,” which force telecom and financial companies to hand over customer data without a warrant. “There is concern that this proposal makes it more cumbersome to investigate a terrorist than it does a criminal,” says a White House official. Expect to hear Obama’s final decision on these and other recommendations in the days before the Jan. 28 State of the Union.

Politics from Newser

Public Advocate Likely to Join Secret Spy Court