CISPA stalled in Senate

From Fight For The Future:

Hey!

Like the villain in bad horror movie, CISPA just won’t stay dead.

The privacy-killing zombie-bill is stalled in the Senate, and today the Whitehouse released their response to a petition against CISPA. Thanks in part to the massive public outcry (yes, you) they made some strong statements in support of users’ rights to privacy.

But given that corporate lobbyists have already spent $605 Million on buying support, we can expect that CISPA will be back in some form soon enough. It’s likely that the Senate will split the bill up into several smaller bills that will be harder to keep track of and rally around.

So.... We made an infographic to get everyone up to speed about the threat that CISPA still poses to our online privacy and our most basic rights. Click here to check it out.

To sign petition:click here

National ID scheme

From Campaign For Liberty

Date: April 29, 2013

To: John Tate
President

From: Norm Singleton
Vice President of Policy

Re: National ID Card Fight Looming

Overview

It is often said, "No man's life, liberty, or fortune is safe while our legislature is in session."

Next week, the Senate comes back in session after a brief one-week recess, so buckle up.

The schemes are coming fast and furious, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to finish up ramming a slew of power grabs through the Senate before Congress' extended August recess. The fights over the National Internet Tax and gun control haven't gone anywhere.

But President Obama, Harry Reid, and the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" also want to get their National ID/"Immigration Reform" bill fast-tracked, knowing that time has helped work to defeat these schemes in the past. As soon as the Senate comes back next week, the fight could begin.

I am not exaggerating at all when I say this is the absolute WORST National ID scheme we've seen to date.

So it's absolutely vital C4L members spring into action to stop this madness NOW.

If we're going to win this fight - especially after all the other battles we've taken on in recent weeks - we simply must start raising resources and generating No National ID Petitions IMMEDIATELY.

We're not going to have much time.

The Gang of Eight's Scheme

"Control the borders." "Path to citizenship." "Amnesty."

There's no end to the buzzwords being tossed around. And this fight is about to get white hot!

But all of the sloganeering is just designed to conceal all the madness contained within this 844-page monstrosity.

In fact, the problems are almost too many to list.

Besides dramatically increasing federal spending, this bill mandates every American carry a federally issued National ID card with their photo.

It also creates a new federal database with biometric information on every American.

If passed, the bill would:

*** Require a new National ID card based on Social Security cards and a national database containing biometric identification information, such as fingerprints, retinal scans, or scans of veins on the back of hands, which could easily be used for government tracking.

*** The card would be required for all U.S. workers regardless of place of birth, making it illegal for anyone to hold a job in the United States who doesn't obtain the ID card;

*** All employers would be required to purchase an ID scanner to verify the ID cards by making sure the information on the card matches the information in the federal database.

So every time any citizen applies for a job, the government would know.

You can bet it's only a matter of time until "ID scans" will be required to travel, attend public events, or make even routine purchases.

By far, the most dangerous part is the biometric tracking technology, which would allow federal bureaucrats to track our every move.

In fact, it sends shivers down my spine just reading through all the new mandates and requirements.

This is exactly the type of battle that often decides whether a country remains free or continues down a slide toward tyranny.

Once government bureaucrats know exactly how we live our lives, it won't be long until they try to run them.

It will only be a matter of time until they spend their workdays making sure you and I don't go anywhere, read anything, eat anything, or drink anything they think we shouldn't.

Knowing many citizens have had massive success derailing National ID schemes at the state level, the statists have come up with a solution . . .

Federalize it.

In other words, they're getting rid of mandates on state governments to create conforming ID cards. Under this legislation, the federal government would just take on the responsibility of issuing these IDs!

The Politics

The National ID card is something the establishment of BOTH parties have wanted for years - and they think they finally have the votes to get it done.

Reading through the names of the top four leaders of the Gang of Eight is enough to make you feel queasy.

John McCain. Lindsey Graham. Chuck Schumer. Dick Durbin.

These senators, knowing they have absolutely ZERO street cred with pro-limited government grassroots, have tapped Senator Marco Rubio to deliver their message.

Senator Rubio, of course, has presidential ambitions.

He's no doubt observed that the last two nominees of the Republican Party - Mitt Romney and John McCain - carved a path to the GOP nomination by consistently stabbing its grassroots' supporters in the back.

Their strategy is to flat-out IGNORE the National ID portions of the legislation.

Instead, the focus will be on how the GOP was shellacked in the last election and simply "must" join with President Obama to pass this legislation.

Just like in the fight over the Second Amendment, the statists don't see the U.S. House as putting up much of a fight against anything the Senate passes.

So the Senate may be our best and only chance to take a stand.

But this fight will move fast.

C4L members MUST start turning the heat up on the U.S. Senate NOW.

Proposed Plan of Attack

Initially, flooding Senate offices with No National ID Petitions should be our goal.

This is to ensure every senator understands that American citizens won't be fooled by their attempts to hide the National ID portion of the so-called "Immigration Reform" bill.

The more Petitions we can generate, the better.

We should urge every Campaign for Liberty member and supporter to sign a Petition and then immediately begin generating them from other folks, as well.

As you know, back in 1998, then-Congressman Ron Paul was able to spearhead an effort inside Congress to repeal a National ID scheme.

I recall how this issue was ignored when Dr. Paul first began talking about it. But then, as grassroots Americans made their voices heard, a flood of representatives joined with Congressman Paul to kill this scheme.

Public pressure was key then, and it will be again for this fight.

But knowing all of this, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid isn't likely to wait around.

So we have to move fast.

As the fight nears, we're going to have to turn up the heat on key Republicans and Democrats who are most likely to go soft.

I'm talking to Hill contacts and working on an exhaustive list of Senators now.

I will have it to you shortly.

But the most important thing now is raising money and generating Petitions for the initial portion of this program.

I know C4L members and supporters understand the stakes.

The fight over National ID is absolutely critical. It's not one we can ignore.

Without signed No National ID Petitions - and C4L members' generosity - we'll be dead in the water.

But this is a fight we CAN win.

Sign the petition

Congress wants to make themselves exempt from Obama Care

One of my Democratic colleagues in the Senate referred to ObamaCare implementation as a coming "train wreck."

Then jaws dropped around Washington as news broke late last week that some Members of Congress might be working behind the scenes to get around a handful of ObamaCare's worst provisions. I believe Congress should NEVER give themselves an exemption from the bad laws they pass.

You and I must tell Congress if they want to be free from ObamaCare's stranglehold, then they must free ALL AMERICANS from this looming disaster. If you agree, I'm counting on you to sign your Repeal ObamaCare Petition TODAY!

You see, the American public's overwhelming opposition to this radical scheme hasn't changed in the three years since President Obama twisted arms and Senate rules to RAM his healthcare takeover into law. But knowing he had a reelection campaign to run, President Obama delayed much of ObamaCare's implementation...

Only now are all the horrific details contained in the 2,700 pages of this law seeing the light.

Just consider these alarming facts:

*** ObamaCare hikes taxes by an estimated $8.6 BILLION while spending a whopping $2.6 TRILLION over the next ten years!

*** The Florida Medical Association recently voiced concern over ObamaCare causing a shortage of doctors;

*** News outlets are beginning to warn of "Rate Shock" as ObamaCare regulations drives insurance premiums through the roof - by over 60% in some states!

*** Fines resulting from ObamaCare's regulations would be at least $2,085 per year, which is expected to cost hardworking American families as much as $10 billion per year.

Now, the Washington Post reports that even two-thirds of Democrats believe ObamaCare is all cost and no benefit. 85% of independents agree.

In fact, over the past few weeks - just as I've predicted - more and more mainstream news outlets are saying "ObamaCare is a prescription for a Democratic headache in 2014."

ObamaCare is ripe for repeal - if my colleagues have the GUTS to force the issue. So in the face of numbers like these, will ObamaCare's apologists in the Senate continue to carry water for this failed policy? Will President Obama?

If they want to continue ignoring the American people, I believe we could see a massive political earthquake in 2014.

I'm committed to fighting until the day ObamaCare is taken off the books.

I'm confident - with your help - that's a day we can soon realize.

But you and I must prove that we're DEAD serious about winning this fight.

So won't you please stand with me by signing your petition TODAY?

I hope you will.

But I'm counting on you to take action IMMEDIATELY.

So please sign your Repeal ObamaCare Petition.

In Liberty,

Senator Rand Paul

P.S. ObamaCare is ripe for repeal - if my colleagues have the GUTS to force the issue.

But you and I must prove that we're DEAD serious about winning this fight.

To sign petition

A thank you from Demand Progress

From Demand Progress:

Some updates, and a request: The House passed CISPA, but that's as far as the bill will go, at least in its present, privacy-obliterating form:

HUFFINGTON POST: Senate Won't Vote On CISPA, Deals Blow To Controversial Cyber Bill.

We played a huge part in this, with Demand Progress members sending more that 200,000 emails to Congress in opposition to CISPA.

But the fight isn't over yet. There's a good chance the Senate will take up some sort of cyber security legislation later this year -- but we've cultivated strong relationships with several senators who really do care about privacy rights, so we'll have real standing there when the time comes. And, of course, we won't hesitate to ask you to weigh in.

And as a reminder for those of you who missed the successful conclusion of our week of action earlier this month: We told you about that frightening new proposal that actually would have expanded and harshened the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act -- the law that makes it a potential federal crime to violate a website's fine-print terms of service agreement.

We asked you to help us stop it in its tracks.

Well, here's the big headline:

HUFFINGTON POST: Internet Activists Win First-Round Victory In Fight Over Anti-Hacking Law

It required a mad (exhausting) fury of activism and lobbying, but it looks like we've won this battle.

This rally capped off a couple of weeks of activism in opposition to that expansion proposal and in support of CFAA reform -- which included 150,000 or so emails to Congress, thousands of tweets and phone calls, and a dozen meetings on Capitol Hill with key Congressional offices.

As the Huffington Post reported:

Internet activists won a major victory this week when House Republicans put the brakes on an effort to vote on reforms to federal anti-hacking laws. The reforms had become a legislative flashpoint in the wake of the death of Aaron Swartz, an Internet activist who was facing a bevy of charges under the controversial Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) before committing suicide in January.

So as you can see, our work together is having a concrete impact. The ground has shifted in our favor, on the CFAA, CISPA, and on Internet freedom in general.

We shocked the political establishment by responding to the new CFAA proposal so quickly, and we have ever-growing credibility and clout with policymakers and the media as we make our case about these issues that we all hold so dear.

But we'll of course need to keep pressing forward. We still want to achieve positive reform of the CFAA. We still need to watchdog the Senate as they consider taking up cyber security legislation of their own. We're expecting movement in the Net Neutrality fight in coming months.

And we'll keep working to defend our civil liberties more broadly, as reactionaries try to exploit fear to constrain our freedom and undermine constitutional protections.

Thanks.

Demand Progress

If you wish to make a donation to Demand Progress:click here

It looks like our activism is paying off. We let the statists know we mean business,that will rise up and protect our rights and that they better take their crap somewhere else like outside our borders.

Axis of Evil

We've got to get out of this place if it's the last thing we ever do we got to get out of this place


We're not going to let a bunch of North Koreans outpsycho us


Everytime you buy Chinese goods you are giving these workers the tools they need.


With Obama in office we thought we'ed give world domination another shot

Let's keep an eye on these countries. I get a bad feeling about them from what is posted here and elsewhere.

Congressional Code of Ethics

Prohibition Against Use of One’s Position With the House for Personal Gain

It is fundamental that a Member, officer, or employee of the House may not use his or her official position for personal gain, including any gain that would accrue to the individual in the form of compensation for outside employment activities. A key provision of the House Code of Official Conduct (House Rule 23, cl. 3) provides that a House Member, officer, or employee may not receive compensation and may not permit compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted from his position in Congress.

As noted in the debate preceding adoption of this rule, an individual violates this provision if he uses “his political influence, the influence of his position . . . to make pecuniary gains.”1 Members and staff, when considering the applicability of this provision to any activity they are considering undertaking, must also bear in mind that under a separate provision of the Code of Official Conduct (House Rule 23, cl. 2), they are required to adhere to the spirit as well as the letter of the Rules of the House. In any event, the Standards Committee routinely advises Members and staff to avoid situations in which even an inference might be drawn suggesting improper conduct.

In addition, the Code of Ethics for Government Service, which applies to House Members, officers, and employees, provides (at ¶ 5) that a federal official should never accept “benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance” of official duties. The Committee found that this standard was violated, for example, when a Member persuaded the organizers of a privately held bank to sell him stock while he was using his congressional position to promote authorization for the establishment of the bank.2 The Member also sponsored legislation to remove restrictions on the development of property in which he had a personal financial interest. Thus, the Member was found to have wrongly used his official position for personal benefit.

In the same vein, the Code of Ethics for Government Service affirms (in ¶¶ 8 and 10) that “public office is a public trust,” and provides that a federal official should “[n]ever use any information coming to him confidentially in the performance of governmental duties for making private profit.”

One of the purposes of these rules and standards is to preclude conflicts of interest. Although the term “conflict of interest” may be subject to various interpretations in general usage, under federal law and regulation, this term “is limited in meaning; it denotes a situation in which an official’s conduct of his office conflicts with his private economic affairs.”3 The ultimate concern “is risk of impairment of impartial judgment, a risk which arises whenever there is a temptation to serve personal interests.”4

These rules and standards are applicable in a wide range of circumstances relating to outside employment. When there is a potential for a conflict of interest to arise in connection with one’s outside employment or other activities, it would be advisable to consult with the Standards Committee before accepting the position. For example, a conflict of interest may arise when the prospective outside employer is an entity with interests before Congress. In no event may a Member, officer, or employee participate in lobbying or advising on lobbying of either Congress or the Executive Branch on behalf of any private organization or individual, even on an uncompensated basis, as that would conflict with a Member’s general obligation to the public.5 Other circumstances that implicate these rules and standards of conduct are discussed below, regarding receipt of excessive compensation, Member official activities on matters affecting their personal interests, outside employment of one’s spouse, conflict-of-interest concerns for staff members, and seeking future employment.

With regard to the outside employment of a staff person, it may be possible for conflict-of-interest concerns to be alleviated through a requirement that the staff person have no involvement in any matter coming before the congressional office that would be of interest to his or her outside employer. However, in some circumstances, such a requirement either is not feasible or would not be sufficient to satisfy the applicable rules and standards. In those circumstances, there may be no alternative to the staff person declining or terminating the outside employment.

Example 1. A newly-hired legislative assistant in a Member’s office who had worked for a consulting and lobbying firm in Washington wishes to continue to work for that firm on a part-time basis. His congressional pay is below the senior staff rate. The federal issues on which he would work for the firm are different from those for which he has responsibility in the congressional office, and he would not engage in any lobbying for the firm. Notwithstanding the proposed limitations on his work for the firm, he may not accept any part-time employment with that firm, as it would violate the general principle that Members and staff are not permitted to lobby Congress.

Example 2. A Member is considering hiring an individual who is a professional grant writer to research and handle constituent grant requests in his district office. The individual would like to continue to operate her grant-writing business on a part-time basis. Because there would likely be, at a minimum, an appearance of use of her official position for personal gain in such circumstances, she must discontinue her outside business upon accepting employment in the congressional office.

Example 3. An outside organization that operates a congressional internship program offers a congressional staff member part-time employment as director of that program. Because such a position would likely require use of contacts and information gained through the individual’s employment with the House, the offer must be declined.

At times a Member or staff person wishes to engage in outside employment that involves the selling of goods or services. On the basis of the rules and standards of conduct set out above, a Member should not undertake any outside employment that would involve the Member personally in the selling or endorsement of any goods or services. On the same basis, at a minimum, any staff person who engages in sales may not solicit purchases from either (1) any non-congressional person with whom the employee came into contact through the congressional office or who has interests before the congressional office, or (2) any subordinate staff in his or her congressional office. In addition, in soliciting sales, House employees may not, directly or indirectly, identify themselves as congressional staff, refer to their congressional duties, or otherwise make use of their status as a congressional employee.

The Standards Committee is available to advise Members, officers, and employees on the applicability of the rules and standards of conduct in other specific circumstances.

Source:click here

I knew this was conflict of interest on Congressman Rogers' part. This is big.

FBI interviews attempted assissin

From Public Advocate:

I have breaking news.

I'm sure you remember the shooter that burst into the headquarters of a fellow pro-Family organization back in August and shot one of their security guards.

What you may not know is this shooter targeted Public Advocate that same day.

A few hours ago, this shocking video was released with the shooter's stunning confession.

The shooter admits "after a little bit of research" he found the location of anti-gay groups from the Southern Poverty Law Center's website where they list and name organization's they believe should be punished.

Watch the video and read about my ongoing battle with the SPLC.

Worse yet, after the attack, the SPLC attempted to update their list of targets by publishing my home address.

More info on Public Advocate: click here

This is proof the Southern Poverty Law Center encourages violence.

Ron Paul endorses Paul Broun

From: Paul Broun
Date: April 24, 2013 03:42:56 PM EDT
Subject: [Ron Paul Endorsement]

Thank you for taking the opportunity to read Congressman Ron Paul's letter of support for my grassroots U.S. Senate campaign in Georgia.

We must elect principled conservatives who aren't afraid to stand up and fight to restore our Constitution and our republic.

I worked side-by-side with Dr. Paul during his time in Congress to cut government spending, repeal ObamaCare, and bring transparency to the Federal Reserve...

...And like Dr. Paul, I proudly served our nation in the Armed Forces.

With you on our side, I know we can build an effective grassroots team to defeat whatever the Obama-Democrats put up against us.

Republicans must re-take the Senate in 2014 and dismantle the destructive Obama agenda. We can't do that without holding the line in Georgia.

I've run tough campaigns before and have been through the fire. During my first campaign in June 2007, I ran against nine other candidates in a free-for-all special election.

Two of us advanced to the July runoff, where I squeaked out a victory over the Establishment's hand-picked candidate.

The very next year in 2008, the "go along to get along" Establishment challenged me again in the primary -- and I won. By November 2008, I had been on the ballot a total of four times in just 17 months. Trust me, I know how to win a GOP primary and build enough momentum to win again in the fall! For nearly two straight years I focused on meeting voters, knocking on doors, and maximizing my grassroots efforts in each of these campaigns.

That's what it takes to succeed in Georgia politics, and that's exactly what I'll do throughout my grassroots campaign for U.S. Senate.

Like Dr. Ron Paul, I recognize the value of public service. As a young man, I enlisted in the United States Marine Corps Reserves and trained to become a jet engine mechanic.

From there, I continued my military service in the US Navy Reserves and completed medical school

I still proudly put on the uniform today as a doctor in the Navy Reserves, where I treat our men and women in uniform.

It's this life of hard work and sacrifice that allows me to fully understand what hardworking Georgia families are going through. Enough is enough. It's time to restore discipline to the federal government.

No more big government... No more higher taxes... No more deficit spending... These are the reckless policies pushed by President Obama, Harry Reid, and their deficit-spending allies in the Senate. It must be stopped.

The fact of the matter is we can't afford to send anymore big spending politicians from either party to Washington.

During my time in Congress, I have been a staunch and steadfast defender of our Constitution and our liberties.

I voted against TARP, the bailouts, and ObamaCare...

...And I routinely oppose other big spending measures that leverage our children and grandchildren's future to score cheap political points.

President Obama, Harry Reid, and the Democrats in Congress have had their foot on the gas for long enough. If we don't stop them, they're going to take us right off the financial and economic cliff! Dr. Paul and I reached out to you today to ask you to join my campaign, so we can put the brakes on the big spending Obama-Reid agenda in Washington. We must reverse course immediately.

I'm battle-tested and campaign-ready to run against whatever liberal Democrat candidate they recruit to run against me. But to win, I must have your support today.

With your generous support, I know I will be able to build a statewide grassroots network of committed conservative activists who will help turn out the vote and defeat the Obama-Reid-backed big spending Democrat.

Thank you for your friendship and support. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

Congressman Paul Broun, MD
Republican, Georgia

P.S. I am proud to have the endorsement of former Congressman Ron Paul, who was a staunch defender of the Constitution during his time in Congress. Together we worked to balance the budget, oppose ObamaCare, and bring accountability and transparency to the Federal Reserve.

To contribute to Paul Broun's campaign click here

This is a good way to get a statist out of the Senate. This guy is endorsed by Ron Paul and if he is elected he will be the fourth voice next to Senators Rand Paul,Mike Lee and Ted Cruz. Broun would be the citizen's friend and the statist's nightmare. This can come true. That is if the electorate in Georgia backs us on this. Are they any pro-Ron Paul people in Georgia and will they elect Paul Broun? I hope so but like the rest of the country I have to sit and wait for the outcome.

CNET gets ahold of CISPA documents

U.S. gives big, secret push to Internet surveillance

Justice Department agreed to issue "2511 letters" immunizing AT&T and other companies participating in a cybersecurity program from criminal prosecution under the Wiretap Act, according to new documents obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

by Declan McCullagh | April 24, 2013 8:59 AM PDT

NSA director Keith Alexander, shown here in a file photo, who's also the commander of the U.S. Cyber Command.

Senior Obama administration officials have secretly authorized the interception of communications carried on portions of networks operated by AT&T and other Internet service providers, a practice that might otherwise be illegal under federal wiretapping laws.

The secret legal authorization from the Justice Department originally applied to a cybersecurity pilot project in which the military monitored defense contractors' Internet links. Since then, however, the program has been expanded by President Obama to cover all critical infrastructure sectors including energy, healthcare, and finance starting June 12.

"The Justice Department is helping private companies evade federal wiretap laws," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which obtained over 1,000 pages of internal government documents and provided them to CNET this week. "Alarm bells should be going off."

Those documents show the National Security Agency and the Defense Department were deeply involved in pressing for the secret legal authorization, with NSA director Keith Alexander participating in some of the discussions personally. Despite initial reservations, including from industry participants, Justice Department attorneys eventually signed off on the project.

The Justice Department agreed to grant legal immunity to the participating network providers in the form of what participants in the confidential discussions refer to as "2511 letters," a reference to the Wiretap Act codified at 18 USC 2511 in the federal statute books.

The Wiretap Act limits the ability of Internet providers to eavesdrop on network traffic except when monitoring is a "necessary incident" to providing the service or it takes place with a user's "lawful consent." An industry representative told CNET the 2511 letters provided legal immunity to the providers by agreeing not to prosecute for criminal violations of the Wiretap Act. It's not clear how many 2511 letters were issued by the Justice Department.

In 2011, Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn publicly disclosed the existence of the original project, called the DIB Cyber Pilot, which used login banners to inform network users that monitoring was taking place. In May 2012, the pilot was turned into an ongoing program -- broader but still voluntary -- by the name of Joint Cybersecurity Services Pilot, with the Department of Homeland Security becoming involved for the first time. It was renamed again to Enhanced Cybersecurity Services program in January, and is currently being expanded to all types of companies operating critical infrastructure.

The NSA and DOJ declined to comment. Homeland Security spokesman Sy Lee sent CNET a statement saying:

DHS is committed to supporting the public's privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties. Accordingly, the department has implemented strong privacy and civil rights and civil liberties standards into all its cybersecurity programs and initiatives from the outset, including the Enhanced Cybersecurity Services program. In order to protect privacy while safeguarding and securing cyberspace, DHS institutes layered privacy responsibilities throughout the department, embeds fair practice principles into cybersecurity programs and privacy compliance efforts, and fosters collaboration with cybersecurity partners.

Paul Rosenzweig, a former Homeland Security official and founder of Red Branch Consulting, compared the NSA and DOD asking the Justice Department for 2511 letters to the CIA asking the Justice Department for the so-called torture memos a decade ago. (They were written by Justice Department official John Yoo, who reached the controversial conclusion that waterboarding was not torture.)

"If you think of it poorly, it's a CYA function," Rosenzweig says. "If you think well of it, it's an effort to secure advance authorization for an action that may not be clearly legal."

A report (PDF) published last month by the Congressional Research Service, a non-partisan arm of Congress, says the executive branch likely does not have the legal authority to authorize more widespread monitoring of communications unless Congress rewrites the law. "Such an executive action would contravene current federal laws protecting electronic communications," the report says.

Because it overrides all federal and state privacy laws, including the Wiretap Act, legislation called CISPA would formally authorize the program without the government resorting to 2511 letters. In other words, if CISPA, which the U.S. House of Representatives approved last week, becomes law, any data-sharing program would be placed on a solid legal footing. AT&T, Verizon, and wireless and cable providers have all written letters endorsing CISPA.

Around the time that CISPA was originally introduced in late 2011, NSA, DOD, and DHS officials were actively meeting with the aides on the House Intelligence committee who drafted the legislation, the internal documents show. The purpose of the meeting, one e-mail shows, was to brief committee aides on "cyber defense efforts." In addition, Ryan Gillis, a director in DHS's Office of Legislative Affairs, sent an e-mail to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence committee, discussing the pilot program around the same time.

AT&T and CenturyLink are currently the only two providers that have been publicly announced as participating in the program. Other companies have signed a memorandum of agreement with DHS to join, and are currently in the process of obtaining security certification, said a government official, who declined to name those companies or be identified by name.

Approval of the 2511 letters came after concerns from within the Justice Department and from industry. An internal e-mail thread among senior Defense Department, Homeland Security, and Justice Department officials in 2011, including associate deputy attorney general James Baker, outlines some of the obstacles:

[The program] has two key barriers to a start. First, the ISPs will likely request 2511 letters, so DoJ's provision of 3 2511 letters (and the review of DIB company banners as part of that) is one time requirement. DoJ will provide a timeline for that. Second, all participating DIB companies would be required to change their banners to reference government monitoring. All have expressed serious reservations with doing so, including the three CEOs [the deputy secretary of defense] discussed this with. The companies have informally told us that changing the banners in this manner could take months.

Another e-mail message from a Justice Department attorney wondered: "Will the program cover all parts of the company network -- including say day care centers (as mentioned as a question in a [deputies committee meeting]) and what are the policy implications of this?" The deputies committee includes the deputy secretary of defense, the deputy director of national intelligence, the deputy attorney general, and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"These agencies are clearly seeking authority to receive a large amount of information, including personal information, from private Internet networks," says EPIC staff attorney Amie Stepanovich, who filed a lawsuit against Homeland Security in March 2012 seeking documents relating to the program under the Freedom of Information Act. "If this program was broadly deployed, it would raise serious questions about government cybersecurity practices."

In January, the Department of Homeland Security's privacy office published a privacy analysis (PDF) of the program saying that users of the networks of companies participating in the program will see "an electronic login banner [saying] information and data on the network may be monitored or disclosed to third parties, and/or that the network users' communications on the network are not private."

An internal Defense Department presentation cites as possible legal authority a classified presidential directive called NSPD 54 that President Bush signed in January 2008. Obama's own executive order, signed in February 2013, says Homeland Security must establish procedures to expand the data-sharing program "to all critical infrastructure sectors" by mid-June. Those are defined as any companies providing services that, if disrupted, would harm national economic security or "national public health or safety."

Those could be very broad categories, says Rosenzweig, author of a new book called "Cyber War," which discusses the legality of more widespread monitoring of Internet communications.

"I think there's a great deal of discretion," Rosenzweig says. "I could make a case for the criticality of several meat packing plants in Kansas. The disruption of the meat rendering facilities in Kansas would be very disruptive to the meat-eating habits of Americans."

Source:click here

I didn't think Obama was against CISPA and I was right. I figured he approved of all the other assaults upon our civil liberties why would he be opposed to CISPA? Now we know truth.

Rogers and Rogers: one sees to its passage the other makes sure its profitable

Congressman Mike Rogers R-Michigan


Kristi Clemens Rogers



Oh Look, Rep. Mike Rogers Wife Stands To Benefit Greatly From CISPA Passing...

from the no-conflict,-no-interest dept

It would appear that Rep. Mike Rogers, the main person in Congress pushing for CISPA, has kept rather quiet about a very direct conflict of interest that calls into serious question the entire bill. It would appear that Rogers' wife stands to benefit quite a lot from the passage of CISPA, and has helped in the push to get the bill passed. It's somewhat amazing that no one has really covered this part of the story, but it highlights, yet again, the kind of activities by folks in Congress that make the public trust Congress less and less.

It has seemed quite strange to see how strongly Rogers has been fighting for CISPA, refusing to even acknowledge the seriousness of the privacy concerns. At other times, he can't even keep his own story straight about whether or not CISPA is about giving information to the NSA (hint: it is). And then there was the recent ridiculousness with him insisting that the only opposition to CISPA came from 14-year-old kids in their basement. Wrong and insulting.

Of course, as we've noted all along, all attempts at cybersecurity legislation have always been about money. Mainly, money to big defense contractors aiming to provide the government with lots of very expensive "solutions" to the cybersecurity "problem" -- a problem that still has not been adequately defined beyond fake scare stories. Just last month, Rogers accidentally tweeted (and then deleted) a story about how CISPA supporters, like himself, had received 15 times more money from pro-CISPA group that the opposition had received from anti-CISPA groups.

So it seems rather interesting to note that Rogers' wife, Kristi Clemens Rogers, was, until recently, the president and CEO of Aegis LLC a "security" defense contractor company, whom she helped to secure a $10 billion (with a b) contract with the State Department. The company describes itself as "a leading private security company, provides government and corporate clients with a full spectrum of intelligence-led, culturally-sensitive security solutions to operational and development challenges around the world."

Hmm. Sounds like a company like that would benefit greatly to seeing a big ramp up in cybersecurity FUD around the globe, and, with it, big budgets by various government agencies to spend on such things. Indeed, just a few months ago, Rogers penned an article for Washington Life Magazine all about evil hackers trying to "steal information." In it, there's a line that might sound a wee-bit familiar, referring to the impression of hackers as being "the teenager in his or her parent's basement with bunny slippers and a Mountain Dew." Apparently, both of the Rogers really have a thing about teens in basements. The article is typical FUD, making statements with no proof, including repeating the NSA's ridiculous allegation that hackers have led to the "greatest transfer of wealth in American history." It's such a good line, except that it's completely untrue. The top US companies have recently admitted to absolutely no damage from such attacks. The article also lumps in "hacktivists" like Anonymous, as if they're a part of this grand conspiracy that needs new laws.

Tellingly, in the print version of Washington Life that this article appeared in, which you can see embedded below, you'll note that there's a side bar right next to her article about the importance of passing cybersecurity legislation in Congress. Guess what's not mentioned anywhere at all? The fact that Kristi Rogers, author of the fear-mongering article, happens to be married to Rep. Mike Rogers, the guy in charge of pushing through cybersecurity legislation. That sure seems like a rather key point, and a major conflict of interest that neither seemed interested in disclosing. Oh, and Kristi Rogers recently changed jobs as well, such that she's now the "managing director of federal government affairs and public policies" at Manatt a big lobbying firm, where (surprise, surprise) she's apparently focused on "executive-level problem solving in the defense and homeland security sectors." I'm sure having CISPA in place will suddenly create plenty of demand for such problem solving.

A few months ago, on one of his FUD-filled talks about why we need cybersecurity, Rogers claimed that it was all so scary that he literally couldn't sleep at night until CISPA was passed due to an "unusual source" threatening us. The whole statement seemed odd, until you realize that his statement came out at basically the same time as his wife's fear-mongering article about cybersecurity. I guess when your pillow talk is made up boogeyman stories about threats that don't actually exist, it might make it difficult to fall asleep.

Either way, even if we assume that everything here was done aboveboard -- and we're not suggesting it wasn't -- this is exactly the kind of situation that Larry Lessig has referred to as soft corruption. It's not bags of money shifting hands, but it appears highly questionable to the public, leading the public to trust Congress a lot less. At the very least, in discussing all of this stuff, when Mrs. Rogers is writing articles that help the push for CISPA, it seems only fair to disclose that she's married to the guy pushing for the bill. And when Mr. Rogers is pushing for the bill, it seems only right to disclose that his wife almost certainly would benefit from the bill passing. And yet, that doesn't seem to have happened... anywhere.

Source:click here

Protest CISPA: click here

Sounds like conflict-of-interest to me and that is very illegal. We should call them on it. It looks like this son of a bitch is going to kill our privacy rights by giving them as an anniversary gift. Fuck him,let's stop him.

CISPA goes to the Senate

From Demand Progress:

Here we go again.

Last week, a majority of representatives in the House voted in favor of CISPA, and therefore in favor of allowing companies to share your personal data with other firms, the US government, and the NSA--all without a warrant and with legal impunity.

On the bright side, the Obama administration once again heard our voices and threatened to veto CISPA if the legislation did not more "carefully safeguard privacy and civil liberties."

Now the fight moves to the Senate, where where we won this fight last year and have some of our staunchest allies. Please sign at right to tell your Senators to oppose any cyber-security legislation that doesn't protect our privacy and civil liberties, and then click these links to get your friends to do the same:

CISPA's corporate backers--IBM, Intel, Verizon, and AT&T--are spending millions lobbying in support of the bill precisely because it empowers them to share your private data with government agencies and the military while safeguarding themselves from legal action.

Indeed, IBM's VP of government affairs admitted last week that his company intended to use CISPA to "work directly and share information directly" with the National Security Agency.

The big corporations are going to keep pushing for CISPA at the expense of their users' privacy and liberties. Sign to tell your Senators to oppose anti-privacy cyber-security legislation now.

Now, as before, we cannot sacrifice our hard-won liberties and privacy rights in the pursuit of a misguided and overbroad conception of "cyber-security."

Sign the petition here

Ron Paul on internet tax mandate

For weeks now, statists like Harry Reid - along with crony capitalists trying to use government power to crush their competition - have been leading the charge for taxing online purchases.

And now, Barack Obama has joined the chorus of tax-and-spenders supporting the National Internet Tax Mandate.

This dangerous bill is currently on the Senate floor, where final passage could be voted on by the end of this week.

Don't let Congress get away with taking a MASSIVE bite out of American prosperity.

In Liberty,

Ron Paul.

Sign petition here

Protect your civil liberties

From Demand Progress:

Open Letter to Politicians: Don't Exploit the Boston Tragedy to Restrict Civil Liberties

We are all deeply saddened by the recent events in Boston, and our hearts go out to those most directly impacted by them. (This has hit close to home for Demand Progress, as our organization has been largely based in New England.)

Sadly, some politicians are already invoking the Boston tragedy as cause to increase surveillance, reduce Americans' due process rights, engage in racial profiling, and even to pass entirely unrelated cyber snooping legislation.

It's highly unlikely that expanded powers would have prevented the bombings. And as Benjamin Franklin admonished us, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

The coming days provide a critical window of opportunity for us to help shape the national discourse in the wake of the events of the last week. Please add your name at right to sign on to our open letter to lawmakers.

Sign petition here

The Internet Tax Mandate is coming up for a vote

From Campaign For Liberty:

Harry Reid is so desperate to RAM through a federally mandated Internet sales tax that he completely skipped the committee process to bring the bill to the floor.

And the vote is going down this week.

That's why it's vital you sign your "No National Internet Tax" petition to your U.S. Senators IMMEDIATELY.

I'll give you the link in a moment, but first let me tell you about Campaign for Liberty's "Battle Plan to Defeat the Internet Tax Mandate."

As you know, the National Internet Tax Mandate would hand the federal government massive new controls over state tax policies and set the stage for government at all levels to take another helping of your money via the Internet.

And every American will feel the pinch - even those who don't use the Internet or only log on to check email once in a blue moon.

Under the Internet Tax Mandate:

*** All Americans would see their taxes go up, as big-spending governors of BOTH parties work with the federal government's IRS goons to implement a state sales tax on ALL goods purchased online.

Big-spending governors are running their states into bankruptcy, and - instead of reducing spending - they want the IRS to force YOU to bail them out with new Internet taxes!

*** Essentially provides big-spending governors new bailout money through the federal government imposing more taxes on their citizens.

We're already seeing this in Virginia, where Governor "Tax Hike Bob" McDonnell is counting on Internet taxes to help fund his transportation boondoggle!

*** The door would be opened for governments to access and keep records of our Internet purchases.

Imagine Barack Obama's hand-picked bureaucrats with a record of every online purchase you make - t-shirts, bumper stickers, books - EVERYTHING you buy.

*** New and higher taxes would CRUSH economic growth and set the stage for massive new regulations that threaten the very existence of the Internet.

Make no mistake. This is all bad enough on its face.

But it's hardly the end of it.

You and I both know, under the guise of "national security," Washington, D.C. bureaucrats are already feverishly looking for new ways to trace, track, and register all Americans' online activity.

What you read. What you buy. What videos you watch. What you write about THEM.

That's why it's vital you sign your "No National Internet Tax" petition IMMEDIATELY.

You and I have a shot at stopping this massive tax hike, but this fight will not be easy.

But unless you and I pull out all the stops - the tax-and-spenders WILL get their way.

Campaign for Liberty has sounded the alarm via hard-hitting mail and email to alert the American people to facts about the National Internet Tax Mandate.

As a result, we have generated over 250,000 petitions opposing this dangerous scheme.

On Monday, C4L will flood the office of EVERY Senator with faxes from their constituents demanding they vote against the National Internet Tax Mandate.

But I'm afraid that won't be enough.

You see, a few weeks ago, the statists held a "test vote" in the Senate on the National Internet Tax Mandate.

Unfortunately, the "test vote" passed with overwhelming "bipartisan" support.

The good news is, although just a "feel good" measure, this "test vote" gave us a target list of 37 Senators to turn up the heat on to vote against any attempt to tax online purchases.

This includes Republicans such as Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Bob Corker (R-TN), Mark Enzi (R-WY), and Jeff Sessions (R-AL), to name a few.

And it also includes Democrats such as Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mark Pryor (D-NC), and Mark Begich (D-AK), who are up for re-election in 2014.

Campaign for Liberty has prepared hard-hitting emails, direct mail, and Google and Facebook Internet ads calling on targeted Senators to oppose the National Internet Tax Mandate.

We can send a strong message to the tax-and-spenders that the American people will not stand for passage of the National Internet Tax Mandate.

That's why it's vital you act TODAY!

You and I are staring head-on at a massive tax hike and invasion of privacy rights - all brought to us by high-priced D.C. lobbyists, big corporations, and establishment insiders and their puppets in Washington.

Harry Reid believes he has the votes to ram through the Internet Tax Mandate.

But just like with Barack Obama's anti-gun agenda, I'm counting on you to help me prove him wrong once again.

So, please sign your "No Internet Tax Mandate" petition to your U.S. Senators IMMEDIATELY.

Your signed petition could help make the difference between winning and losing this battle.

And this is not a fight you and I can afford to lose.

I'm convinced that by mobilizing Americans against the National Internet Tax Mandate, you and I can stop this massive tax hike dead in its tracks.

But we don't have much time. Harry Reid is forcing a vote THIS WEEK.

Please sign your petition to help with this effort.

It's vital you act TODAY!

In Liberty,

John Tate
President

P.S. Harry Reid is so desperate to ram through the National Internet Tax Mandate that he completely skipped the committee process to bring the bill to the floor.

And the vote is going down this week.

That's why it's vital you sign your "No National Internet Tax" petition IMMEDIATELY.

To sign the petition click here

If you don't want another tax and you hate bigger more intrusive government then sign the petition. Don't slack off and let it be someone else's responsibility sign it to safeguard your freedoms. The only one who safeguard your rights is you don't put it on someone else. Sign today.

Ron Paul delegate pushed around

Ron Paul Delegate Sues City of St. Peters Over Caucus Arrest

Brent Stafford Claims Constitutional Rights Violated

By William Browning | Yahoo! Contributor Network – 16 hrs ago.

During the heated Republican primary and caucus season in the spring of 2012, an incident in St. Charles County, Mo., led to the arrest of a Ron Paul delegate at a local caucus. Brent Stafford is now suing the city of St. Peters, Mo., and police officer Tim Hickey over his incarceration of March 17, 2012. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Eastern Missouri filed a lawsuit in federal court Monday on behalf of Stafford. The plaintiff seeks remediation for his incarceration, which he feels violated his First Amendment rights to free speech.

* The 13-page legal complaint in U.S. District Court demands a jury trial against the city and Hickey. Five points are brought against the defendants, including false arrest and malicious prosecution.

* Stafford led Paul's campaign for St. Charles County last year. He was also a member of the county's Republican central committee. It was this central committee that hosted the caucus at Francis Howell High School.

* The plaintiff alleges two police officers, hired by GOP leaders to provide security at the meeting, were told to "expect 'trouble'" from Paul supporters. Stafford claims in his complaint that the "'trouble' ... was that Ron Paul would win."

* Stafford also contends he would have been elected the caucus chair had Eugene Dokes, chairman of the committee, run the meeting according to proper procedure. The plaintiff alleges nominees for the chair of the caucus were closed after a single nomination.

* The plaintiff alleges he was arrested for trespassing even though dozens of people remained in the high school gymnasium after being ordered to depart or face arrest. Stafford was arrested on a public sidewalk outside the building. A video of Stafford's arrest, labeled Exhibit 1 in the filing, shows the events as they unfolded outside the school. Several other videos of the caucus exists even though caucus leaders tried to ban video and audio recordings of the event.

* The Associated Press reveals the plaintiff was acquitted of his trespassing charge by a municipal judge in St. Peters. Stafford was jailed for three hours following the failed caucus.

* The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports the city had not received a copy of the lawsuit as of Monday afternoon. City officials have not yet responded to the lawsuit.

* The plaintiff believes his rights under the First and 14th Amendments were violated, his person was unreasonably searched without a warrant, his liberty was deprived without due process and his liberty was deprived for three hours.

* In addition to attorney's fees, Stafford seeks unspecified monetary damages. Five counts are brought against the city including violations of rights, false arrest, malicious prosecution, false arrest under state law and malicious prosecution under state law.

William Browning is a research librarian specializing in U.S. politics.

Source:click here

We won the first round against the CFAA

From Demand Progress:

Alright. This email should serve as a pick-me-up.

We told you about that frightening new proposal that actually would have expanded and harshened the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act -- the law that makes it a potential federal crime to violate a website's fine-print terms of service agreement.

We asked you to help us stop it in its tracks.

Well, here's the big headline:

HUFFINGTON POST: Internet Activists Win First-Round Victory In Fight Over Anti-Hacking Law

It required a mad (exhausting) fury of activism and lobbying, but it looks like we've won this battle.

And we're fresh off of our rally in Boston this afternoon -- we went offline and took to the streets. And as you can see from this photo, it was a great success.

We rallied downtown and marched to the court house where Aaron's trial would've been coming to a close this week, and demanded criminal justice reform and accountability for the prosecutors.

This rally capped off a couple of weeks of activism in opposition to that expansion proposal and in support of CFAA reform -- which included 150,000 or so emails to Congress, thousands of tweets and phone calls, and a dozen meetings on Capitol Hill with key Congressional offices.

As the Huffington Post reported:

Internet activists won a major victory this week when House Republicans put the brakes on an effort to vote on reforms to federal anti-hacking laws. The reforms had become a legislative flashpoint in the wake of the death of Aaron Swartz, an Internet activist who was facing a bevy of charges under the controversial Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) before committing suicide in January.

So as you can see, our work together is having a concrete impact. The ground has shifted in our favor, on the CFAA and on Internet freedom in general.

We shocked the political establishment by responding to the new CFAA proposal so quickly, and we have ever-growing credibility and clout with policymakers and the media as we make our case about these issues that we all hold so dear.

But we'll of course need to keep pressing forward. In addition to the CFAA, we need to return our focus fighting the privacy-obliterating cyber-snooping CISPA bill this week, and there's much more on the horizon.

Thanks.

Demand Progress

Good news indeed. This shows activism pays off. Now only if MRA's did the same thing.

Regroup and attack

From Campaign For Liberty:

Rand's Filibuster Effort

The gun grabbers won the first battle in the war over our gun rights earlier today by voting 68-31 to defeat Rand Paul's filibuster of Harry Reid's motion to bring gun control to the floor.

Sixteen Republicans voted wrong, and two Democrats voted right.

Here are the 16 Republican Senators who chose to stand with Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, and Dianne Feinstein instead of Rand Paul:

Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Richard Burr (R-NC), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Susan Collins (R-ME), Bob Corker (R-TN), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Dean Heller (R-NV), John Hoeven (R-ND), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Mark Kirk (R-IL), John McCain (R-AZ), Pat Toomey (R-PA), and Roger Wicker (R-MS).

The two Democrats who voted right were Mark Begich (D-AK) and Mark Pryor (D-AR).

I've spoken to a few of my sources on Capitol Hill today.

I know we've been jokingly asking for weeks if Harry Reid is really the Speaker of the House, since he seems to drive the agenda . . .

As you know, House Speaker John Boehner has already passed three bills through the House by using Democrat majority votes.

That used to be considered a big "NO-NO" - even by weak-kneed Republican Speakers.

And Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor haven't said it won't happen again, which means that anything Harry Reid gets through the Senate will more than likely be gaveled through the House, as well.

So we need to really focus on the Senate over the next few days and try to defeat this monster there. If we can convince 9 of those 16 Republicans to switch, we can prevail.

Senate Strategy

The ball is in Harry Reid's court, so there's no way to know for sure exactly what his next move will be.

But I got a good hint at what he will do from my inside sources.

It looks like Harry Reid is going to offer three dangerous, anti-gun Amendments to S. 649.

The three Amendments I've heard about so far include:

Toomey-Schumer Gun Control Bill

Republican Senator Pat "Benedict" Toomey (R-PA) teamed up with Democrat Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) and introduced a so-called "compromise" gun control bill.

But the reality is that this bill is even more dangerous than Dianne Feinstein's so-called "Assault Weapons Ban."

I've heard that Toomey's bill was actually written by Chuck Schumer himself.

Senator Toomey's bill would ban virtually all private gun sales, restrict the Second Amendment freedoms of travelers, strip folks who seek mental health of their gun rights, undermine state sovereignty, and set the stage for full-scale national gun registration.

The bill is so bad it's even supported by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's "Mayors Against Illegal Guns."

The Feinstein Gun Ban

This legislation, which would target rifles, shotguns, and even handguns, is also far from dead.

President Obama and Harry Reid are determined to push the envelope. With Republicans already demonstrating their willingness to roll over, I would prepare for the worst.

"High-Capacity" Magazine Restrictions

This Amendment would ban magazines that hold over a certain number of bullets.

Those are the three anti-gun Amendments I'm hearing about so far.

Grassroots Mobilization Effort to Defeat Gun Control

The good news is, even though we lost the first battle earlier today, the war is not over.

Senators Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee are going to drag out the debate as long as possible, and they have also vowed to filibuster Reid's vote on final passage of the bill.

This gives us more time to turn the heat up on the Senate.

Again, if Campaign for Liberty members and supporters can generate enough pressure to convince 9 of the 16 Senators who voted wrong today to Stand With Rand on final passage, we have a shot at stopping this monster in the Senate.

I understand things are tight right now with all the fights we're currently facing.

But I recommend C4L spend every penny it can afford to mobilize as many folks as possible to turn up the heat on their Senators to Stand With Rand.

Flood the Senate with tens of thousands of "Stand With Rand" Petitions" and phone calls in opposition to Harry Reid's gun control scheme.

If enough folks make their voices heard, we can defeat Barack Obama's gun control agenda.

It's critically important that Campaign for Liberty members and supporters turn up the heat on the 16 Republican Senators who voted against Rand's filibuster and any Democrat who has to face their constituents soon, while urging the two Democrats who voted right to stay the course.

The vital point to remember is that this is only round one. There's a strong temptation to throw in the towel in disgust at the 16's sellout today, but this is precisely when we need to double down.

If they think the pressure is off because one cloture vote is finished, then they really don't know anything about us.

So let's remind them.

To sign the petition click here

A setback but not a loss

From The National Association For Gun Rights:

Earlier today, on the vote to proceed to debate on President Obama’s anti-gun agenda, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid succeeded in overcoming Senator Rand Paul’s filibuster.

And 13 NRA "A Rated" Republicans and 9 "A Rated" Democrats voted to help him do it (Plus 2 more NRA "B Rated" politicians).

I’m going to give you a list of these wolves in sheep’s clothing shortly, but our job now is crystal clear -- let these turncoats know that any gun control that passes now is their fault.

But first it’s absolutely critical you know where this fight is now headed . . .

Unfortunately, the timing of the coming fights is extremely difficult to predict at this point.

So you and I must be on guard every second.

EVERY United States Senator needs to feel even more heat from Second Amendment supporters.

You see, even among the 31 Senators who stood with Rand Paul for the filibuster, there are some who are scared of Harry Reid and the media that they may cave in on some kind of insider deal.

That's why with your help, I’m committed to ramping up all of our most critical programs -- including mail, email, internet, radio and our hard-hitting TV-ad buys that have multiple Senators whining in the press.

As part of these efforts, I’ve crafted a special No Gun Control/No Deals Emergency Fax Petition I’m going to ask you to sign IMMEDIATELY. Whatever you've done before, we need to double-down the pressure RIGHT NOW.

And if possible, please forward them to your pro-gun friends and family members, as well.

Right now, the United States Senate could take up for discussion three amendments to S.649 as early as this evening, including:

*** The Feinstein Gun Ban, targeting rifles, shotguns and even handguns;

*** Magazine Bans, outlawing the importation, manufacture and sale of magazines holding more than just a handful of rounds;

*** The so-called “Toomey-Manchin” Universal “Background Check” (NATIONAL GUN REGISTRATION) Bill, which was actually written by Chuck Schumer (D-NY). The S.649 language itself -- even apart from all of these amendments -- includes ATF Witch Hunt provisions designed to terrorize gun owners.

With Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid now calling the shots after invoking cloture on Senator Paul’s heroic filibuster of the motion to proceed, he holds all of the cards as far as timing.

If a vote becomes imminent, rest assured I will alert you IMMEDIATELY.

But there’s one thing I can assure you.

If you and I are going to hold off this madness, we’re going to have to fight back like never before.

It won’t be easy. I believe we can.

But the truth is, all of these assaults could have been turned back this morning.

In fact, if any bad legislation ultimately is passed into law, the blame can be laid at the feet at the following Republican turncoats who voted to end Senator Paul’s filibuster, including:

Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) – NRA A rated

Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) – NRA A rated

Richard Burr (N.C.) – NRA A rated

Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) – NRA A rated

Tom Coburn (Okla.) – NRA A rated

Susan Collins (Maine) – NRA C+ rated

Bob Corker (Tenn.) – NRA A rated

Jeff Flake (Ariz.) – NRA A rated

Lindsey Graham (S.C.) – NRA A rated

Dean Heller (Nev.) – NRA A rated

John Hoeven (N.D.) – NRA A rated

Johnny Isakson (Ga.) – NRA A rated

Mark Kirk (Ill.) – NRA F rated

John McCain (Ariz.) – NRA B+ rated

Pat Toomey (Pa.) – NRA A rated

Roger Wicker (Miss.) – NRA A+ rated

13 of these Senators have NRA “A-ratings.”

This is how the game is played in Washington, D.C.

And if you and I are going to retain any semblance of freedom in this country, the LIES politicians and any group that covers for them tell are going to have to be exposed for what they are.

That’s exactly what the National Association for Gun Rights has done during this fight -- and exactly what we will continue to do.

The good news is, this fight is far from over.

If filibustered, each amendment will have to receive 60 votes to pass.

Then the legislation will have to overcome the 60-vote threshold to proceed to final passage through the Senate.

Perhaps the greatest danger is an insider-cooked "grand deal" that will include some token pro-gun “sweetener” -- a minor protection or fake step forward on gun rights to make it easier for supposedly “pro-gun” Democrats and weak-kneed Republicans to sell to their constituents -- wrapped around BIG gun control changes.

An example would be a mental health protection for veterans.

Another (bad) idea is a national concealed-carry reciprocity law, handing our federal government control over state concealed-carry laws.

President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder want more say over who can’t buy guns.

And they want more names of those who do, so they can set the stage for what every gun owner fears . . .

Ultimate CONFISCATION.

They’re doing everything they can to lay the groundwork for that tragic day right now.

I need you to stand with me and help fight back.

So please sign your No Gun Control/No Deals Emergency Fax Petition IMMEDIATELY.

I’m doubling down on all our programs.

Every one.

In the coming hours, I’m preparing to unleash an all-out nationwide email, mail, internet and TV-ad blitz.

The more generous you are, the more I can turn up the heat on the Senate.

So please give as generously as you can today.

Every dollar you can give will make a tremendous difference.

I will keep you updated on any new developments as soon as they take place.

For Freedom,

Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

P.S. The timing of the coming fights is extremely difficult to predict at this point, so you and I must be on guard every second.

With your help, I’m committed to ramping up all of our most critical programs -- including mail, email, internet, radio and TV ad buys.

As part of these efforts, I’ve crafted a special No Gun Control/No Deals Emergency Fax Petition I’m going to ask you to sign IMMEDIATELY.

To sign the petition click here

Patrick J. Buchanan on the holocaust

From Patrick J. Buchanan

Was the Holocaust Inevitable?

Friday - June 20, 2008 at 12:07 am

by Patrick J. Buchanan

“What Would Winston Do?”

So asks Newsweek’s cover, which features a full-length photo of the prime minister his people voted the greatest Briton of them all.

Quite a tribute, when one realizes Churchill’s career coincides with the collapse of the British empire and the fall of his nation from world pre-eminence to third-rate power.

That the Newsweek cover was sparked by my book “Churchill, Hitler and The Unnecessary War” seems apparent, as one of the three essays, by Christopher Hitchens, was a scathing review. Though in places complimentary, Hitchens charmingly concludes: This book “stinks.”

Understandable. No Brit can easily concede my central thesis: The Brits kicked away their empire. Through colossal blunders, Britain twice declared war on a Germany that had not attacked her and did not want war with her, fought for 10 bloody years and lost it all.

Unable to face the truth, Hitchens seeks solace in old myths.

We had to stop Prussian militarism in 1914, says Hitchens. “The Kaiser’s policy shows that Germany was looking for a chance for war all over the globe.”

Nonsense. If the Kaiser were looking for a war he would have found it. But in 1914, he had been in power for 25 years, was deep into middle age but had never fought a war nor seen a battle.

From Waterloo to World War I, Prussia fought three wars, all in one seven-year period, 1864 to 1871. Out of these wars, she acquired two duchies, Schleswig and Holstein, and two provinces, Alsace and Lorraine. By 1914, Germany had not fought a war in two generations.

Does that sound like a nation out to conquer the world?

As for the Kaiser’s bellicose support for the Boers, his igniting the Agadir crisis in 1905, his building of a great fleet, his seeking of colonies in Africa, he was only aping the British, whose approbation and friendship he desperately sought all his life and was ever denied.

In every crisis the Kaiser blundered into, including his foolish “blank cheque” to Austria after Serb assassins murdered the heir to the Austrian throne, the Kaiser backed down or was trying to back away when war erupted.

Even Churchill, who before 1914 was charging the Kaiser with seeking “the dominion of the world,” conceded, “History should … acquit William II of having plotted and planned the World War.”

What of World War II? Surely, it was necessary to declare war to stop Adolf Hitler from conquering the world and conducting the Holocaust.

Yet consider. Before Britain declared war on him, Hitler never demanded return of any lands lost at Versailles to the West. Northern Schleswig had gone to Denmark in 1919, Eupen and Malmedy had gone to Belgium, Alsace and Lorraine to France.

Why did Hitler not demand these lands back? Because he sought an alliance, or at least friendship, with Great Britain and knew any move on France would mean war with Britain — a war he never wanted.

If Hitler were out to conquer the world, why did he not build a great fleet? Why did he not demand the French fleet when France surrendered? Germany had to give up its High Seas Fleet in 1918.

Why did he build his own Maginot Line, the Western Wall, in the Rhineland, if he meant all along to invade France?

If he wanted war with the West, why did he offer peace after Poland and offer to end the war, again, after Dunkirk?

That Hitler was a rabid anti-Semite is undeniable. “Mein Kampf” is saturated in anti-Semitism. The Nuremberg Laws confirm it. But for the six years before Britain declared war, there was no Holocaust, and for two years after the war began, there was no Holocaust.

Not until midwinter 1942 was the Wannsee Conference held, where the Final Solution was on the table.

That conference was not convened until Hitler had been halted in Russia, was at war with America and sensed doom was inevitable. Then the trains began to roll.

And why did Hitler invade Russia? This writer quotes Hitler 10 times as saying that only by knocking out Russia could he convince Britain it could not win and must end the war.

Hitchens mocks this view, invoking the Hitler-madman theory.

“Could we have a better definition of derangement and megalomania than the case of a dictator who overrules his own generals and invades Russia in wintertime … ?”

Christopher, Hitler invaded Russia on June 22.

The Holocaust was not a cause of the war, but a consequence of the war. No war, no Holocaust.

Britain went to war with Germany to save Poland. She did not save Poland. She did lose the empire. And Josef Stalin, whose victims outnumbered those of Hitler 1,000 to one as of September 1939, and who joined Hitler in the rape of Poland, wound up with all of Poland, and all the Christian nations from the Urals to the Elbe.

The British Empire fought, bled and died, and made Eastern and Central Europe safe for Stalinism. No wonder Winston Churchill was so melancholy in old age. No wonder Christopher rails against the book. As T.S. Eliot observed, “Mankind cannot bear much reality.”

Source:click here

McCain is a senile old moron

John McCain attacks Rand Paul on filibuster, drones saying he needs to ‘calm down’

U.S. Sen. John McCain slammed fellow Republican Rand Paul on the Senate floor Thursday morning for his 13-hour filibuster to block John Brennan’s confirmation as CIA Director.

“Calm down, Senator,” McCain said, in an address to Paul. “The U.S. government cannot randomly target U.S. citizens.”

In his filibuster Wednesday, Paul criticized the White House over its drone policies, and for refusing to rule out military strikes against U.S. citizens on American soil.

McCain said Thursday that Paul’s warnings that the U.S. could target “Jane Fonda” or “people in cafes” bring the debate into the “realm of the ridiculous.”

“If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids,” McCain said, adding: “I don’t think what happened yesterday is helpful to the American people.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) echoed these criticisms, adding that he was “disappointed” in the 13 Republican Senators who supported Paul’s filibuster last night. Graham scoffed at Paul’s question about whether Obama thinks he has the authority to kill a noncombatant American citizen on U.S. soil.

“I find the question offensive,” Graham said Thursday on the Senate floor. “As much I disagree with President Obama and as much as I support past presidents, I do not believe that question deserves an answer.” Paul’s question, the South Carolina Republican said, “cheapens the debate.”

Graham later told reporters that he will vote to confirm Brennan as a result of the filibuster

Source:click here

I am so sick of hearing about John McCain,that senile old bastard from Arizona. He is a fucking STATIST in all caps. Wherever the forces of liberty go to defend civil liberties and freedoms McCain is there to counter us and oppose us,time and time again. He has never once stood on the side of liberty in fact he is our biggest opponent on the Republican side of the aisle. McCain's disdain for us "liberty kids" is obvious and his understanding of how the government is ran is very limited or he under estimates everybody else. If you received a watered down third rate education by a modern union teacher who couldn't care less and cannot be fired due to tenure then maybe you'll believe McCain. On the other hand if you received a quality education then you know McCain is full of shit. The government is "of the people,for the people and by the people". The people run the government. That is why McCain must run to keep his job and if he loses he goes back to Arizona to stay,which sounds great to me. If there were no elections he would just meet someone in a office to discuss performance reviews. Sounds like McCain needs to either take a course in civics or get off our Libertarian backs.

Senator Lindsey Graham has made good decisions in the past. His standing up to VAWA is admirable but he's got it wrong this time. There can be some positive changes. Unfortunately a lot of Republicans want to be liked by the liberal media and to do so they will sell out core conservative values if they think it will gain them favorable coverage. Unfortunately for them the liberal media hates them and will do anything against them. Senator Graham,if you are reading this or hear about it that dinner with Obama may have been the most expensive meal yet. I don't believe the voters of South Carolina sent you to Washington DC to clink glasses with Obama. I'm sure when they heard about it they were probably very upset. If Obama and the Democrats can accept the National Review hates their guts then the Republicans have to accept the New York Times hates their guts. If you are a Libertarian and a resident of Arizona or South Carolina let McCain and Graham know where you stand.

Secret vote on CISPA

From Fight For The Future:

If you're a Google, Facebook, or Twitter user, or if your friends are, you should be worried.

Today, Congress held a secret vote on CISPA, the modern government surveillance system that every website, including Google, Facebook, and Twitter could participate in, if it becomes law.

Here's one important way to protect all that data they have on you right now.

Facebook supported CISPA when it was proposed last year. This time, even Facebook is saying the bill has privacy problems, but we still haven't heard from Google or Twitter.

Will they let the government get all of our data against all privacy laws? Will they share your personal data with the government once you're no longer able to sue them for it? We don't know.

As Congress takes a secret vote on CISPA, tell these companies: "No way! We want to trust your privacy policy and believe you will stand by it! Respect our privacy!"

This is an important moment to get them before it's too late.

That's why Reddit's co-founder, Alexis, called Google's CEO himself to ask them about where they stand on CISPA.

We're making headway -- FFTF is delivering 300,000 signatures to CISPA co-sponsors one by one over Twitter. But the threat of CISPA moving forward in the House is very real. The bill passed out of Committee today and will be rushing to a floor vote next week.

Help your friends too and forward this email.

It's your email; tell Google to support your right to keep it private!

It's your private information; tell Facebook and Twitter to keep it that way!

Take an important step to protect all that data they have on you right now.

Thank you for everything,

Tiffiniy Cheng, Fight for the Future

Who's with us? Who isn't? Make your voice heard here

If you want to keep your private information private and preserve your rights to sue for grievences you may want to sign the petition. Don't delay.

The Senate vote happens tomorrow

From Campaign For Liberty:

Republican Senator Pat "Benedict" Toomey (R-PA) is doing Barack Obama and Harry Reid's bidding for gun control.

Late last night, Pat Toomey teamed up with Democrat Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) to give the gun grabbers the “bipartisan compromise” they need to help RAM Barack Obama's anti-gun agenda into law.

According to inside sources, Pat Toomey's anti-gun bill has Chuck Schumer's fingerprints all over it.

The most important vote in the ENTIRE fight over gun control will take place tomorrow morning in the U.S. Senate when Harry Reid attempts to move gun control to the floor.

That's why it's critical you sign your Stand With Rand Filibuster Fax Petition IMMEDIATELY to urge your U.S. Senators to support Rand Paul's filibuster.

Our plan is to flood Senate offices with tens of thousands of faxes from pro-gun Americans demanding their Senators back the Rand Paul filibuster.

After you sign your Filibuster Fax Petition, please also take five minutes to call both your U.S. Senators and urge them to support Rand Paul's filibuster against Harry Reid's Motion to Proceed to bring gun control to the Senate floor.

Contact you Senators here

You see, the gun grabbers only need five Republicans to oppose Rand Paul in order to get the 60 votes required to break a filibuster.

Unfortunately, even before Pat Toomey's sellout, five Republicans had already hinted at their opposition to Rand Paul's filibuster.

So if you and I are going to stop Barack Obama's gun control agenda, it's going to take a massive uprising of grassroots gun owners all across the country.

So please sign your Stand With Rand Filibuster Fax Petition and call your U.S. Senators IMMEDIATELY.

The good news is, Harry Reid can't count on all Senate Democrats to oppose Rand Paul's filibuster.

In fact, a handful of Democrats who have to face the voters next election haven't yet made up their minds as to whether or not they will stand with Rand Paul or Pat Toomey.

So if enough Americans stand up and make their voices heard, you and I have a shot at winning this fight.

That's why it's vital you sign your Stand With Rand Filibuster Fax Petition and call your U.S. Senators right away.

You and I are up against the most dangerous threat to our Second Amendment freedoms in our lifetime.

And without your IMMEDIATE action, I'm afraid the statists will soon erase what remains of this fundamental constitutional protection.

You and I must flood the Senate with tens of thousands of faxes and phone calls in support of Rand Paul's filibuster.

So please, sign your Stand With Rand Filibuster Fax Petition IMMEDIATELY.

And take five minutes to call both of your U.S. Senators and insist they Stand With Rand!

There's not a moment to waste. Please take action NOW!

In Liberty,

John Tate
President

P.S. The Senate fight over our God-given right to keep and bear arms will go down tomorrow morning.

This fight is expected to be won or lost by just a few votes, so your IMMEDIATE action is critical.

Please, sign your Stand With Rand Filibuster Fax Petition IMMEDIATELY.

After you sign your Filibuster Fax Petition, please also take five minutes to call both your U.S. Senators and urge them to support Rand Paul's filibuster against Harry Reid's Motion to Proceed to bring gun control to the Senate floor.

To sign the petition click here

Senator Toomey contact info

If your rights matter to you sign that petition. If you are peeved at Senator Toomey for selling out you may want to give him a piece of your mind. Encourage your Senators and Toomey to Stand With Rand.

Say no to Reid and stand with Rand

Congress is going to reconvene soon which means that If you haven't already acted upon the petitions now would be the time to do so so they know where you stand. A couple of things that are going to be brought up in Congress-both the House and Senate. The first one is the Internet Tax Mandate and a pledge to stand with Senator Rand Paul as he battles Senator Harry Reid and other statists. Our freedoms are on the line,the civil liberties we hold dear are on the line. If Reid wins we lose. It's that simple. Defend our freedoms,defeat Harry Reid and his statist schemers.

Don't delay. Act today.

CFAA: fix don't expand

From Demand Progress:

1. Tell Congress:
Don't Expand the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: Fix It!

And scroll down to join the Internet-wide week of action by embedding our contact-Congress widget on your site.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is the law under which Aaron Swartz and other innovators and activists have been threatened with decades in prison. The CFAA is so broad that law enforcement says it criminalizes all sorts of mundane Internet use: Potentially even breaking a website's fine print terms of service agreement. Don't set up a Myspace page for your cat. Don't fudge your height on a dating site. Don't share your Facebook password with anybody: You could be committing a federal crime. (Read more here.)

It's the vagueness and over breadth of this law that allows prosecutors to go after people like Aaron Swartz, who tragically committed suicide earlier this year. The government threatened to jail him for decades for downloading academic articles from the website JSTOR.

Since Aaron's death, activists have cried out for reform of the CFAA. But members of the House Judiciary Committee are actually floating a proposal to expand and strengthen it -- that could come up for a vote as soon as April 10th! (Read more here.)

Add your name at right to join us in telling Congress to defeat the bill to expand the CFAA, and to pass a law to reform it to protect innovators and ordinary Internet users. If you have a website, please consider embedding our banner or widget on your site to encourage your visitors to join the cause.

2. Use Our Widgets To Encourage Your Site's Visitors To Join The Cause
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Starting on Monday, April 8th, we're asking sites across the web to join in a week of action, led by the Internet Defense League (the same groups that helped lead the fight against SOPA).

Please consider using our widgets to spread the word. They're easy to embed on your site and will help us drive thousands of constituent contacts to Congress.

We're asking sites to put them up on Monday, April 8th, and keep them up for as long as possible.

3. Help Spread The Word: Put Yourself "In Jail" On Facebook
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We've built a playful way for you to spread word about the CFAA and ask your friends to get involved.

In solidarity with those who've been threatened with prison under the CFAA, we're asking you to "jail" yourself on Facebook. We'll grab your profile photo, overlay prison bars on top of it, and repost it to your wall so your friends can see it. We'll include information about how the CFAA threatens ordinary Internet users -- and how your friends can join our fight.

The CFAA makes it a potential federal crime to violate a website's terms of service. Help make sure your friends know how ridiculous this law is, and how it jeopardizes us all.

To sign petition click here

It seems like everytime I turn around the government is playing little fucking statists games. It is a bipartisan effort so no one is innocent. That is why watchdog groups are needed to keep the government honest. The best way we can keep the government honest is by signing that petition.