Speaking up WORKS

[Oxymoron]

Email from Change.org expressing gratitude for supporting the petition to stop the extradition of Richard O'Dwyer.

The 'bunk' is that the U.S. feel it has the right to extradite people who are not its citizens, have never set foot in America and have broken no laws in America.

If someone breaks an international law it is for the Country of residence to put that person on trial under its own laws, not for America to have the right to kidnap people of the world just because they don't like them.

In the U.S you have State Laws where some things are illegal in one State and not another.

"We're thrilled this ordeal is finally over for Richard and that his extradition has been withdrawn. We may not have convinced the UK Home Office to block the extradition but the US authorities certainly heard your voice and the 253,000 people who joined you in signing Jimmy Wales’ petition on Change.org, without which this outcome would not have been possible so thank you."

-- Julia O'Dwyer, Richard's mother​

On Wednesday, Richard O'Dwyer's extradition was formally withdrawn at the High Court after an agreement was reached with US authorities in New York, halting Richard's extradition.
This is a fantastic outcome for Richard and his mother Julia, who has campaigned tirelessly for her son over the last 18 months.
You were one of over 253,000 people who signed Jimmy Wales' petition on Change.org calling for the UK Home Office to stop the extradition. Although Theresa May didn't block Richard's extradition, the public support for Jimmy's campaign was noted in negotiations with the US and helped to show the US authorities that their actions won't go unnoticed.

Content from External Source

 

[Mick West]

Sounds good to me. I'm not fan of big media and the RIAA. I'm not in favor of unrestricted piracy either - but they are overly heavy handed, and backwards in their approach.

 

[Oxymoron]

Martial Law looks like it may be averted for a while due to public protests in Paragould Arkansas:

http://www.infosalvo.com/us-news/martial-law-in-arkansas/

"[Police are] going to be in SWAT gear and have AR-15s around their neck," Stovall said. "If you're out walking, we're going to stop you, ask why you're out walking, check for your ID."

"We're going to do it to everybody," he said. "Criminals don't like being talked to."
Going even further, Mayor Gaskill backed up the Chiefs ideology by saying, "They may not be doing anything but walking their dog," he said. "But they're going to have to prove it."
Legally though, an officer cannot ask for ID without probable cause. So what probable cause is given to justify police marching through the streets with assault rifles? Stovall justifies the idea as follows:
"To ask you for your ID, I have to have a reason. Well, I've got statistical reasons that say I've got a lot of crime right now, which gives me probable cause to ask what you're doing out. Then when I add that people are scared...then that gives us even more [reason] to ask why are you here and what are you doing in this area."
Going on to say against those who refuse to produce identification, "…we have a right to be doing what we're doing. We have a zero-tolerance. We are prepared to throw your hind-end in jail, OK? We're not going to take a lot of flack." "Anyone that's out walking, because of the crime and the fear factor, [could be stopped]," he said.
According to the article, Stovall apparently wasn't bothered by the mention of his plan sounding like martial law where he proclaims, "I don't know that there's ever been a difference" between his proposals and martial law. Individuals who refuse to produce identification will be charged with obstructing a governmental operation.

Content from External Source

So how bad is the supposed crimewave?

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Paragould-Arkansas.html

A statisticaly derived number is given each year representing crime levels. For violent crime it is:

2010 Paragould = 203.3 U.S average = 222.7
2009 Paragould = 211.3 U.S average = 238.0
2008 Paragould = 252.9 U.S average = 252.4

Content from External Source

So maybe this initiative could be rolled out across the U.S? Coming to a town near you soon?

Well you are apparently ok for the time being as there does seem to be some public opposition but whether it is enough to stop the crackdown scheduled for January 2013, we shall have to see.


http://www.paragoulddailypress.com/articles/2012/12/18/top_story/doc50d08e9fb2588217300183.txt

Paragould police have canceled the remaining two town hall meetings that had been planned to discuss crime in Paragould after extensive public outcry over the department’s controversial proposal to lower the crime rate.

Content from External Source

In a statement on PPD’s website, the department said the town hall events were canceled in the interest of public safety after speaking with “numerous” residents and non-residents on Monday.

“Some of the correspondence has caused us great pause in whether or not the meetings should remain as scheduled,” the statement read.

“We feel that with the strong feelings on both sides of the Street Crimes Unit issue, a safe and productive meeting would not be the probable outcome.”

Content from External Source

Hope they got enough prison space

 

[Oxymoron]

Are we getting there piecemeal?

Following on in the Marshal Law, NWO plans theory.... Tin Foil Hat Brigade /'Twoofers' score another home goal by being right again in suggesting plans are afoot for Martial Law and in suggesting Aurora and Sandy Hook could be 'excuses' to justify it. Poor Twoofers.

So it seems the battle to resist the imposition of Martial Law goes on as yet another proposal to 'ease it in' is put forward in the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/...dy-hook-shooting-sen-boxer-proposes-using-nat

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) wants governors across the US to have access to National Guard troops for school security in the wake of the shooting in Newtown, Conn., according to Politico.

On Friday, 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot and killed his mother before going on a shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary school.

Content from External Source

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-co...ting-governors-use-national-guard-152409.html

Boxer, who said the legislation is modeled after a previous law that had National Guard troops help with border security, would allow governors to decide how troops would be used at schools. While a governor already has the power to send troops to a school, the legislation would allow for the governors to access federal funds for those troops, she said.

While not ruling out the possibility of military-clad National Guard troops at school entrances, Boxer also said those troops could be used to help improve infrastructure at schools or relieve police officers from desk work that would allow the police departments to assign more cops to schools.

Boxer pointed to the $640 billion national defense bill and argued that some of those funds should be used to protect schools.

“Is it not part of the national defense to make sure our children are safe?” Boxer said.

Content from External Source

 

[solrey]

Following on in the Marshal Law, NWO plans theory.... Tin Foil Hat Brigade /'Twoofers' score another home goal by being right again in suggesting plans are afoot for Martial Law and in suggesting Aurora and Sandy Hook could be 'excuses' to justify it. Poor Twoofers.

In the same way that a broken clock is right twice a day, or throwing enough shite at the wall and hoping that something sticks.

One single senator introduces a bill, that most likely will never make it past committee, in a knee jerk reaction to score points with their constituents and 'twoofers' see it as a step to marshall law? Might want to loosen the straps on those tin foil hats boys and girls... just sayin'.

According to your own reference there Oxymoron, Boxer hasn't even talked to her colleagues or the WH about the bill she introduced, which has exactly zero co-sponsors, btw.

Not that I agree with Sen. Boxer's proposal, however I, like many others, are utterly disgusted by the culture of violence festering in America.

... And some of the most violent comments I've seen on the net are written by 'twoofers'. I can't tell you how many times I've been threatened by 'twoofers', ironically for simply telling the truth.

 

[SR1419]

Are we getting there piecemeal?

Tin Foil Hat Brigade /'Twoofers' score another home goal by being right again in suggesting plans are afoot for Martial Law.

comments like this really just show the desperation that "twoofers" will go to spin the facts into their own delusional propaganda.

Governors ALREADY have access to National Guard troops, which are de facto state militias, and could call them in to protect schools if they chose. Suggesting that asking the Federal Government to help pay for that equates to "plans...for Martial Law" shows an inherent bias bordering on delusion.

 

[Oxymoron]

comments like this really just show the desperation that "twoofers" will go to spin the facts into their own delusional propaganda.

This is a debunking website and we are on the conspiracy thread. The post needs to fall into that catagory, ergo certain criteria, as quoted, needs to be said otherwise a likely response will be 'where's the bunk Oxy' I will take the bullet here

Governors ALREADY have access to National Guard troops, which are de facto state militias, and could call them in to protect schools if they chose. Suggesting that asking the Federal Government to help pay for that equates to "plans...for Martial Law" shows an inherent bias bordering on delusion.

I already said they have that power. Looks like they want to use it. Looks like they want to have it funded at federal level.

Do you really want SWAT teams, National Guards with full military kit like in Iraq at your kids school gates and wandering the streets demanding your id and where you are going and where you have been.

Does this seem a bit over the top?

Counterproductive?

Martial Law... which people on this site keep assuring people like me is not the aim of TPTB?

Is it not what the 'twoofers' have been warning about and everyone pounces on them 'shut up you stupid twoofers, you are idiots, of course this will never happen'?

Debunk away!

I shall be relieved if you can.

 

[SR1419]

Looks like they want to use it. Looks like they want to have it funded at federal level.

They? No, Barbara Boxer perhaps...but no collective "they".

If a bill is passed then you can say that- but until then...

Sorry, I missed the part where She said she wanted them in "full military kit" and "wandering the streets demanding your id and where you are going and where you have been"

Don't let your fear get in the way of the facts.

 

[Mick West]

I already said they have that power. Looks like they want to use it. Looks like they want to have it funded at federal level.

So then how exactly do you got from that to this:

Do you really want SWAT teams, National Guards with full military kit like in Iraq at your kids school gates and wandering the streets demanding your id and where you are going and where you have been.

Where does it say SWAT teams? Where does it say full military kit? Where does it say they will be asking you "where you have been".

It's a request for funding. They could fund it themselves if they really wanted to do it.

 

[Oxymoron]

So then how exactly do you got from that to this:


Where does it say SWAT teams? Where does it say full military kit? Where does it say they will be asking you "where you have been".

It's a request for funding. They could fund it themselves if they really wanted to do it.

The reference draws on the similarity of the previously quoted above attempt to install a form of Martial Law in Arkansas

http://www.paragoulddailypress.com/a...8217300183.txt

and

While not ruling out the possibility of military-clad National Guard troops at school entrances

Content from External Source

So is it not an attempt at imposition of Martial Law in stages?

Does this have no relevance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability of people to react to significant changes that occur gradually

Content from External Source

Of course they could fund it themselves but why do that if there is a chance of getting federal military funding...which is abundant... may even get some tanks thrown in.

Also, it has official sanction from high authority if they get that funding... i.e. the government agree it so it is justified.

But no... keep poo pooing and then when it is established and I say 'you were warned', you can either justify it with some government BS or say 'this is a conspiracy site Oxy... where is the conspiracy, its just the law'.

 

[solrey]

I already said they have that power. Looks like they want to use it. Looks like they want to have it funded at federal level.

There is no "they"! It's just ONE senator that introduced ONE bill with ZERO co-sponsors... that's it. All the proposed bill would do is allocate x-amount of defense budget dollars to be used to cover the costs of national guard troops at schools should governors decide to deploy them in that capacity. Governors already have the authority to deploy guard troops pretty much anywhere they want to.

Trying to conflate that with one podunk little town in Arkansas wanting to basically increase police presence in high crime neighborhoods, is well... delusional.

Heres' what the Paragould police department has to say, btw.

http://paragouldpolice.org/press_view.php?id=80&PHPSESSID=883636dfca615cd728104bcc5912d689

Ever been to Arkansas? They have tons of meth labs and meth related crime. I lived in a little place in a county on the border of AR in south central MO for a couple of years. The local police department in a town of just 800 in a county with only 5,000 residents hired an extra full time detective to focus on just meth.

 

[Oxymoron]

There is no "they"! It's just ONE senator that introduced ONE bill with ZERO co-sponsors... that's it. All the proposed bill would do is allocate x-amount of defense budget dollars to be used to cover the costs of national guard troops at schools should governors decide to deploy them in that capacity. Governors already have the authority to deploy guard troops pretty much anywhere they want to.

Trying to conflate that with one podunk little town in Arkansas wanting to basically increase police presence in high crime neighborhoods, is well... delusional.

Heres' what the Paragould police department has to say, btw.

http://paragouldpolice.org/press_view.php?id=80&PHPSESSID=883636dfca615cd728104bcc5912d689

Ever been to Arkansas? They have tons of meth labs and meth related crime. I lived in a little place in a county on the border of AR in south central MO for a couple of years. The local police department in a town of just 800 in a county with only 5,000 residents hired an extra full time detective to focus on just meth.

Wow.... you mean they actually hired a whole extra full time detective... what they didn't need a tank and kitted out military units with proctoscopes , body armour and combat rifles? What is wrong with those people... don't they know people need to feel safe and the best way to do that is as in the podunk little town in Arkansas they need a 'select group of officers to saturate the area in an attempt to curb the criminal behavior'.

The statement you link to at least has some semblance of humility in it unlike the previous statements:

"[Police are] going to be in SWAT gear and have AR-15s around their neck," Stovall said. "If you're out walking, we're going to stop you, ask why you're out walking, check for your ID."

"We're going to do it to everybody," he said. "Criminals don't like being talked to."
Going even further, Mayor Gaskill backed up the Chiefs ideology by saying, "They may not be doing anything but walking their dog," he said. "But they're going to have to prove it."
Legally though, an officer cannot ask for ID without probable cause. So what probable cause is given to justify police marching through the streets with assault rifles? Stovall justifies the idea as follows:
"To ask you for your ID, I have to have a reason. Well, I've got statistical reasons that say I've got a lot of crime right now, which gives me probable cause to ask what you're doing out. Then when I add that people are scared...then that gives us even more [reason] to ask why are you here and what are you doing in this area."
Going on to say against those who refuse to produce identification, "…we have a right to be doing what we're doing. We have a zero-tolerance. We are prepared to throw your hind-end in jail, OK? We're not going to take a lot of flack." "Anyone that's out walking, because of the crime and the fear factor, [could be stopped]," he said.
According to the article, Stovall apparently wasn't bothered by the mention of his plan sounding like martial law where he proclaims, "I don't know that there's ever been a difference" between his proposals and martial law. Individuals who refuse to produce identification will be charged with obstructing a governmental operation.

Content from External Source

But the effect is still the same, just a bringing down of the rhetoric a notch or two.

Still you are obviously in favour.... perhaps you may even consider moving there.... sounds yummy

 

[Oxymoron]

Pitchforks may be passe but there is more than one way to skin a rat.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...promises-pay-20m-corporation-tax-2-years.html

Starbucks last night caved in to public pressure and agreed to pay millions in corporation tax amid fears of a growing consumer boycott.

The global coffee group struck a deal with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to pay £20million over the next two years, whether or not it reports a profit.
The move will bring valuable money into Treasury coffers and piles pressure on other multi-nationals such as Google and Amazon to restructure their affairs to make contributions.
But critics said the figure was an ‘arbitrary’ contribution to try to quell public anger over Starbucks’ financial affairs and warned it could go back to its ‘immoral’ tax-avoiding ways within 12 months.
The deal, they said, was evidence of Britain running a ‘voluntary’ tax system where companies opt to pay what they like, rather than what they owe.


The move will pile pressure on Google and Amazon to bow to public pressure and contribute to government coffers.

All three were brought before the Public Accounts Committee last month to explain why they paid little or no corporation tax.

Content from External Source

​

 

[lotek]

i agree with your first post oxy.

 

[Oxymoron]

i agree with your first post oxy.

Thanks.... Yes I think it important because the U.S appears to be trying to prosecute anyone and everyone they choose no matter where in the world they are.

I can understand the second may be controversial but I would be interested to know why you do not necessarily agree with the latest post?

The last post is more to do with the openness of the fraud which is going on by banksters and corporations. It is not Conspiracy Theories but factual conspiracies whereby 'the elite openly flaunt their frauds'. I am really pleased that, albeit in some small regard, the peasants are revolting and having an impact. Hope it escalates.

Max Keiser looks at how amateur the Illuminati and Bilderbergers are compared to the modern day Fixers of Oz

Someguy posted on this also but from a different source https://www.metabunk.org/threads/515-Illu...ll=1#post40190

​

 

[JRBids]

I think it must be very tiring and stress inducing to believe things like you do Oxy. I have enough things in my real life that could cause stress if I let them, or if I did not deal with them, to add fearing that the next time I go walk my dog I'm going to be confronted with soldiers in military gear asking for my papers is so far out of the realm of the possible that I can't imagine entertaining the idea.

 

[Oxymoron]

I think it must be very tiring and stress inducing to believe things like you do Oxy. I have enough things in my real life that could cause stress if I let them, or if I did not deal with them, to add fearing that the next time I go walk my dog I'm going to be confronted with soldiers in military gear asking for my papers is so far out of the realm of the possible that I can't imagine entertaining the idea.

For millions it is a reality... guess a lot felt like you before it happened to them. There are a lot of people fighting to stop it happening to them as well. The people Max is talking about are pathological, they really don't care about people. It is no conspiracy theory, it is clear and present danger... they are above the law and they know it and they love it.

 

[Oxymoron]

Snoopers Charter is Dead... But is it like Jason of Friday 13th franchise?

http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/

More than a year ago, we learned that the Home Office was resurrecting it’s plan to monitor every British citizens’ internet use. Big Brother Watch led the charge against these plans, giving evidence to Parliament, urging our supporters to write to their MPs and being the central force in the media campaign against the so called Snoopers Charter. We highlighted how the Home Office had misrepresented the work of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre to support the bill, demonstrated alternatives were available – and that was before the technology companies tore into the proposals.

When the Joint Committee on the Draft Communications Data Bill published our report, we hosted a press conference that included David Davis MP, Jimmy Wales, Sir Chris Fox and Lord MacDonald.

Last week, we published 15 reasons why the Bill was the wrong approach.
The Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, has just announced that the Communications Data Bill is dead. He said on LBC : “What people dub the snoopers’ charter, that’s not going to happen – certainly with Lib Dems in government.”

(Governments by convention never comment directly on the content of the Queen’s speech so it is impossible for it to be explicitly ruled out, however “not going to happen” is a fairly clear signal.)
Nick Clegg has made the right decision for our economy, for internet security and for our freedom.

Content from External Source