Beyond the Cusp

February 24, 2016

FBI Makes Hating Apple Hard to Do

 

Apple is going to take their case to a higher source and they may need to appeal to an even higher intervention as the court has joined the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) ordering Apple to provide what they refer to as a ‘key’ which the FBI could use to defeat the security encryption system which allows users to encrypt their data keeping it private only available to somebody who knows the security code. The encryption has the added feature that it makes the time before another code can be entered longer and longer as incorrect codes are entered and erases all the information after a number of wrong guesses have been entered. Let me admit right up front that I have avoided Apple products in favor of LG whose phone and pad I use while our proof-reader does love her antique i-phone which does not have the encryption option as the hardware only was installed starting with the newer units, we won’t say which as we ought not anger the proof-reader. Still, we both agree with Apple that they should not be forced to give the FBI a generalized code or any method which could be utilized on any other i-phone but there will be almost as many arguments as there are people and that is something right down our alley, taking a side and then defending it.

 

The first thing we need to take a look at is who the judge is in this case. Sheri Pym was originally a United States District Court for the Central District of California who was then appointed to sit as a United States Magistrate Judge on April 15, 2011. The duties of Magistrate Judges include conducting preliminary proceedings in criminal cases, the trial and disposition of misdemeanor cases, conducting discovery and various other pretrial hearings in civil cases, the trial and disposition of civil cases upon consent of the litigants, and other matters as may be assigned. Magistrate Judges are appointed for a term of eight years, and can be reappointed to additional terms. This is a Judgeship as part of the United States District Judge which appears to have been a position where the court system itself recommends who they believe is capable and meets a set of criteria to become this particular level of District Court Judge. Judge Pym prior to her appointment served as an Assistant United States Attorney and Chief of the Riverside branch office of the United States Attorney’s Office, doing mostly criminal prosecution work. Prior to joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office, she was an associate at Milberg Weiss LLP in San Diego, where she represented plaintiffs in class actions involving consumer fraud, wage and hour violations, securities fraud, and tobacco litigation, and also worked in the firm’s appellate department. From what we have been able to ascertain this position is one where the appointment is more of a promotion than it is an appointment the President would necessarily take the time to review anything more than the recommendation of the office promotion recommendations and sign off and the United States Senate would receive this as likely a group of such appointments and routinely sign off, yes that requires their voting on the appointment, more than they would labor and debate possibly calling Judge Pym to appear in Washington D. C. for hearings as they would an appointment to the Federal Court of appeals. If anybody has additional information preferably with links and sustaining documentations we would very much appreciate such information made in the comments below and we thank our readership for any such assistance they can provide.

 

Now to the case itself and what we could discern as the reasoning. Where it is understandable that the FBI would really love to have access to every last bit of information they can get their hands on in any and every case, especially those where they have a target and need to find a case to present; it is also understandable that they really would like to get into the cell phone with the minimal hassle and time invested of anyone suspected of being attached to a criminal enterprise which in this instance includes terrorist activity. The FBI also has previously run into instances where i-phones have been encrypted and they likely lost vital information and time attempting to get past the Apple encryption system and also after making several attempts to get past the encryption lock had the phone wire and destroy any information the i-phone may have had within including the all-important phone logs including phone numbers which might break other cases or cement their current investigation. In this instance the iPhone 5c was a work phone used by Syed Farook, who along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik, murdered fourteen people in San Bernardino, California last December. This is a solid reason for desiring to get past the encryption without erasing the very data the FBI seeks in this case, which considering the terrorists were killed, means seeking deeper contacts and potential ties with terror cells or other links which the FBI may already be investigating. There is not known information contained in the i-phone so this is not the ticking time-bomb situation though our bet is this was part of the FBI argument that they might in the future have just such a situation and going through having Apple gain entry into the i-phone might take longer than they would have.

 

 

This July 27, 2014 photo provided by U.S. Customs and Border Protection shows Tashfeen Malik, and Syed Farook as they passed through O'Hare International Airport in Chicago

This July 27, 2014 photo provided by U.S. Customs and Border Protection
shows Tashfeen Malik, and Syed Farook as they passed through
O’Hare International Airport in Chicago

 

 

This leads to a simple question, what was the critical piece of law, writ, judgement, precedent or other critical information on which this case is relying for its reasoning and/or precedent. According to the information we found, the particular was the All Writs Act, a law stretching back over two centuries. All Writs Act of 1789 (United States Code › Title 28 › Part V › Chapter 111 › § 1651) reads:

(a) The Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.
(b) An alternative writ or rule nisi may be issued by a justice or judge of a court which has jurisdiction.

When reading the notes and supplemental information we believe we found the specific application utilized by Judge Sheri Pym to back her decision and granting her the power to require Apple to comply. It reads as follows:

“The Supreme Court and the district courts shall have power to issue writs of scire facias. The Supreme Court, the circuit courts of appeals, and the district courts shall have power to issue all writs not specifically provided for by statute, which may be necessary for the exercise of their respective jurisdictions, and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.”

 

This reads, if we are not mistaken, such that a judge can pretty much make up their own precedent by simply not being capable of finding any ruling or law pertaining to the case before them. Something tells us that this reasoning is not going to stand upon further review and that this case will be appealed by either side until the Supreme Court has decided or refused allowing the decision of the lower court to stand, in this case the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (oft referred to as the Ninth Circus due to loopy decisions overturned subsequently by the Supreme Court, particularly in recent history). The fact that this law stretches back almost to if not actually to antiquity when it comes to United States law and is likely enacted to give cover to judges to use sparingly, and since it was referred to regularly as the “judge invoked a little-know law,” we feel comfortable thinking that this one is on the chopping-block when it reaches the Supreme Court in Washington D. C. which is where numerous old laws either came to die or received a supercharging and left Washington D. C. with a whole new set of super powers. We can only hope this little known law receives the death penalty and is quickly executed. Allowing a judge, any judge, to make things up on the fly is far too dangerous a power. Just because there is no law applicable to a situation should never be the reason empowering a judge to invent powers to a law, or are these super powers, just to make their decision they would like to make applicable in a case. Do not get me wrong, Apple is one company among a list of companies which I would support almost any reasonable, key word here, reasonable, judgment with which to knock them down a peg, but even I cannot fathom allowing this power to be resurrected and allowed to stand in a society as litigious as the United States or we will have United States District Judges all over the nation adding turbochargers and then superchargers to what they see as underpowered laws which need heavier application which they just want so bad they can taste it. We can taste that too; and it is called tyranny, a tyranny, warned about by the Greek philosopher Alontesquieu who cautioned, “There is no tyranny, than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.” This should be written on a nicely framed gavel holder which includes and amply sized gavel even for the most insecure or overbearing judge may require or feel the need with this inscription placed under a strong and shatter-proof glass on every judge’s dais so they may read it every time they raise that gavel.

 

 

Greek philosopher Alontesquieu who cautioned; “There is no tyranny, than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.”

Greek philosopher Alontesquieu who cautioned;
“There is no tyranny, than that which is perpetrated
under the shield of law and in the name of justice.”

 

 

What this case will eventually fall under is the letter of the law and not how far out of shape such law can be twisted, folded, bent, widened or supercharged and it will likely be found as falling in antithesis to Amendment IV of the Bill of Rights. Amendment IV reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

So, where do cellphone data fall on this lovely right deemed so important to the safety and protection from government run wild with a hunger for absolute power came for protection? That requires deciphering what information a cellphone may contain and where such items might belong by seeking their earlier non-digital age counterpart. Our cellphones keep our phone numbers, e-mail addresses, potentially actual addresses and other pertinent and deemed quickly recoverable information on each entry we place in the cellphone. The complexity and depth of information may vary, but generally this replaces our personal phonebooks which most definitely are protected as being both papers and effects thus requiring a warrant for any law enforcement officer, even an FBI agent, to acquire before accessing such information. The argument that both Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook are currently deceased (never underestimate the ever increasing power of medical science) and thus do not have the right to such protection and as they obviously had perpetrated a heinous crime of murdering fourteen innocent victims, there should be no great hurry requiring any urgent access. This is even more obvious as the FBI has had possession of their cellphones likely for close to two months, so instant access is not required here. The FBI could take the cellphone(s) in question down the road to Apple and have them access all the data in the cellphone(s) and leave them fully open and with the encryption access decommissioned permitting easy access to all the information within the cellphone(s) available to the investigators as they proceed with their case investigations. The ‘key’ the FBI is requesting could be utilized on any i-phone which is encrypted to gain access nearly instantly and thus be able to take anyone’s i-phone 5 or better running iOS 8 or later version software and gain full and complete access to the information on such a device, i-phone or i-pad. Giving the FBI such a tool would subsequently be demanded by every Federal Agency in order to supplement their investigative arms in accessing i-phones or i-pads including the personal devices of their employees. Once again they would not need to have any pressing need for the information requiring such easy access but they would still desire having such power.

 

Imagine how quickly they could run down that entry on-line which a supervisor found insulting or out of line and desired to know from whose i-phone such a post was sent. The reasoning excuses would be endless. Then State Police, city police, county police, homeowners associations, who knows where such would stop, the leader of a quilting society, who knows. This judgment will have far reaching implementations galore if it is allowed to stand. Apple should even be granted protection from having to divulge this key until the final appeal date has been passed or the Supreme Court has ruled or lower court decision allowed to stand simply to protect this proprietary information from being compromised. I am sure it would irreparably damage i-phone should this ‘key’ become available to hackers as this would quite possibly give them access to records which may include a person’s passcodes for their every account on-line or at the ATM or wherever they kept user name and password information, vital information. So, we have established the fact that this is a phonebook on steroids, but still a phonebook. What else do we keep stored on our phones, especially i-phones or i-pads? Well, there are the photographs, though they are now called images. Well, our yearbooks, photo albums and the like are definitely papers and effects. We keep our schedule and any alarm settings such as your not so friendly wake-up your phone provides every day, in the case of i-phones every day needed or not, with a wake-up alarm of your choosing, mine is a lullaby. These too are amongst your effects. If your home security system is linked to your i-phone or i-pad that counts as giving them access to your house, another little pesky item so very protected by Amendment IV.

 

All the items kept on our phones, tablets and any other mobile electronic devices and the access they provide to items requiring a passcode or possible entry to our homes and vehicles (oops, vehicles are not protected and by a decision ruling that because they are mobile and could be used to conceal items pertinent to the case at hand and as they could be used to take evidence beyond jurisdiction of the law enforcement at hand, they can be broken into even without our permission, but they would not require our phone or tablet to pry open the trunk of our vehicle) safety boxes with electronic locks, safes, refrigerator (some of us have wives assisting with our diets, who me?, no, I’m just cuddly plump) and whatever else requires a passcode or electronic key which our phone or tablet provide. All of these items are things which require an individual warrant to gain entry and so should our electronic devices. There are reasons that would actually go into areas under Amendment V which does not allow for law enforcement to force us to incriminate ourselves. This comes in to play as say the police have a warrant to search your home for a stolen watch, a Rolex just to make it grand theft Rolex (maybe there is a game in there somewhere and maybe a movie series with a future Rolex which is also a time machine) and they have a warrant to search for that item and they find your slightly less than legal cable set up stealing your neighbor’s signal. Technically they cannot arrest you and use that evidence as it was not included in the warrant, though you would be wise to ‘repair’ that little hook-up and fast because there may be another warrant or an angry cable enforcement officer (like they have such things) visiting you and your neighbor real soon. The law is not made to trap the average person for minor transgressions, which falls under peer pressure to keep one within acceptable bounds. We could call that the oral code as versus the written code which is the police’s domain. Anything on your i-phone or i-pad is protected under Amendment IV and thus entries usually requires a warrant which requires probable cause and a whole host of other information and are about as difficult to attain as an ice cream sundae. For a warrant you fill out the form and submit it to a judge whose position is to review and approve or deny the law enforcement a warrant while an ice cream sundae requires one to visit an establishment, order one (fill out the required forms) and wait for it with a requirement that you will pay for the ice cream sundae before leaving or there may be a warrant in your not too distant future.

 

In conclusion, the FBI is requesting a general tool to gain data in a particular investigation where they have another option of having the lock removed on the particular item which they desire to inspect its contents. The item is locked not unsimilar to a safe in ones purse or pocket (pretty neat or at least we thought so). This electronic lock can be bypassed by the company which makes the items in question. The contents of the locked item all come under the qualities and qualifications legally as being persons, papers and effects as defined by Amendment IV giving them Constitutional protection. Where a specific entry is possible and Apple would and has provided such assistance in the past but this has proven for too laborious for the FBI to pick up the phone and make an appointment, often so far in the future as to resemble, ‘How long would it take you to get here or would you prefer our technician to come to your location in case you have any other difficulties, officer sir’ kind of laborious efforts. So, instead of going through almost five easy peasy chocolate smoothie steps, the FBI is asking that the courts demand for Apple to give them the ‘key’ which could then be used on any i-phone or i-pad using iOS 8 or later version software and gain full and complete access to the information on such a device. Sure, and here are the electronic ‘keys’ to the ICBM missile silos, are there any other items we could grant you today officer, Sir? So, the judges in the case, Judge Sheri Pym, researched the books, had her clerks research and find some two-hundred-twenty-seven year old statue and blow a century and a half off the records as it has not been used in a while, finding the All Writs Act on which to base her decision. The All Writs Act says, in synopsis, that if a judge cannot find an actual law but finds instead some Federal Code or Law which has yet to be defined as they wish to twist and otherwise mutilate, spindle, bend and otherwise slice and dice and rearrange the letters to finally produce something which they can use, then go for it, you go judge. Judge Sheri Pym made just such a leap of legalistic gymnastics to order Apple to sacrifice one of their selling points by handing over to the FBI a key which can be used to circumvent the passcode effects of both erasing all information thus protected after a set number of incorrect entries and remove the ever lengthening delay before one can enter their next guess so that the FBI can use a password entry device which inputs passcodes at a blindingly mind-numbing speed thus being capable of, if left at its fastest speed and all other limiting or defeating software or hardware limitations probably defeat any code or password of up to twelve characters in under two minutes. As they are describing their request, all they want is to be able to use this code breaking machine on any i-phone or i-pad using iOS 8 or better as it would be so helpful in this case they are currently working on. Never mind that they could have had Apple open the device for them without any muss or fuss but no, they want the power, the power to defeat everybody’s Apple product on the planet as they are the all and powerful Oz, sorry, only the FBI so we are dealing with the little man behind the curtains already and he wants the power for Oz, where Oz is the great and powerful Federal Government and it had 535 little men and women standing behind the curtains called the Capital Dome on picture taking day. Let us hope that this decision gets flamed at the next level and that hold all the way to the top even if that top is the Supreme Court and may we live to read about that case. Remember, it should end up under Amendment IV with a possible assist from Amendment V and Apple should win. Drat!

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

December 17, 2014

Has the World Gone Crazy? Government Wants to Look and See

 

Thus far this week we have witnessed too many instances of violence from all across the globe with none of it making much sense. There was the taking of hostages in a small eatery in Australia with a wannabe ISIS crazy who amongst his demands insisted on talking to the Prime Minister of the country. There was a Taliban raid on a Pakistani school murdering innocent children with the count approaching one-hundred-fifty and nearly countless more reportedly in area hospitals, let’s pray it does not exceed that number. The United States did not miss out as a former Marine went on a killing spree in Philadelphia northwestern suburb in Pennsylvania murdering his ex-wife and her sister, mother, grandmother and two children of the sister as well as shooting and injuring the sister’s husband. These, as with too many murders reported unfortunately almost daily, are the actions of disturbed minds or people blinded beyond sanity by their cause will remain beyond our ability to understand. Where the twisted reasoning behind any murder may be beyond the ability of our ability to discern and understand, efforts should continue to see if any discerning and identifying character traits or other determining actions and indicators can be discovered such that in the future some of these grisly events can be prevented. We will probably never have the ability to prevent every time somebody goes beyond all societal norms and commits some act of violence tearing a hole in society as a whole.

 

The question we as societies will need to answer is how far are we to permit law enforcement to go both in their abilities to collect information and survey public or even private areas in order to prevent crimes and provide a higher level of safety in their efforts to circumvent crimes, especially crimes of violence. There are already increasing usages for cameras and sound detection equipment in cities throughout the world with London taking the lead as the most surveyed city with sound detectors and cameras placed throughout so that they can see virtually every area of the streets, river, shopping centers, service alleys and probably the darkest recesses and corners throughout the city. Surveillance carried out to such an extent combined with the advancing artificial intelligence advances in computer technology including facial recognition software, gait detection and profiling which will lead to computers monitoring the entirety of these cameras and potentially adding the microphones so that they can discern every spoken word and conversation using software collating the data in order to alert police to suspected criminal acts they determine are imminent. The police would be directed in the hope that their mere presence would prevent the crime and to interdict any criminal act as soon as it occurs or prevent any violent action intervening at the predicted moment such violence might occur. It would be a virtual future crime system used as deterrence and placing police exactly where they might be needed moments before any criminal act. For crimes such as theft or a holdup such a system would likely deter many criminals but then how far would such a system be empowered. Would they use such a system to determine the name of a person crossing a street in other than a designated crosswalk and send them a summons or ticket just as speed cameras and red light cameras do in many cities currently? Such a system would potentially provide a huge increase in revenue which could potentially completely finance the entire police department.

 

If placing cameras and listening devices all throughout our cities and towns is acceptable, then what if the government decides to go further? It would start with a program where the government would give people payment if they were permitted to add any monitoring cameras and sound devices people currently had in their homes and businesses. The program would begin innocently and be voluntary so what would be the harm, people could simply say they have no interest and such a program might make others who would be unable to afford an alarm system with cameras and twenty-four hour monitoring and such a program would be enabling more homes to be monitored and kept safe. What argument could be made that this was not a good thing and it is still voluntary, right? Then the government would eventually see this as now a right they could extend as were not most of the people who had systems voluntarily opting to join the government subsidy. Anyways, anybody now refusing the government mandated monitoring systems and the government including these systems in their extensive monitoring would be proof that you have something to hide. The thing is such a demand would not be instituted until the vast majority of the public had already agreed to this monitoring by the government and nobody had been adversely affected, so where is the harm in government placing monitoring in every home. Such monitoring would keep homes safe from burglaries while people were at work and where would be the harm? There was a time when people would only accept a ticket if it was written by an officer who had witnessed their exceeding the speed limit or running a red light. Nobody would accept a ticket from a camera radar trap and receiving one would result in their going to court and demanding to confront their accuser. Initially this defense was accepted by the courts and then the city council allowed for a regulation, or even passed a law in some instances, that made these tickets legal and no longer permitted the defense of demanding to confront your accuser and thus no judge would accept that defense. It has become common for camera evidence to be considered superior to an eye witness’s testimony. Add facial recognition and cameras can be utilized to identify people beyond any reasonable doubt in most courts. Where these automated law enforcement technologies will end is anybody’s guess. The camera and the microphones are just the tip of the coming iceberg as we can expect explosives detection systems placed in sensitive areas or places where large crowds are expected to form such as malls, ballparks, amusement parks, concerts, fairs and special events as well as whatever devices and data gathering system which have yet to be developed. Many of the larger ports and other commercial shipping and mass travel systems including trains, planes and ships have detection equipment which checks the luggage or shipping containers as well as magnetometers to check the people while visual checks are made of carryon luggage and bags. These detection devices are simply a computerized version of using a dog or other trained animal and currently almost as reliable and their evidence is acceptable in a court as sufficient evidence for permitting an officer to search and arrest any person refusing the search in order to search the person once in custody.

 

There are numerous types of surveillance equipment with abilities which would astound the average person readily available to police departments should they care to make the outlay funds to purchase such devices. There is equipment which can listen to a conversation simply by placing an invisible laser onto any window to the room which the conversation of interest is being held. This technology has progressed to the point that one would need to cover the window with sound dampening screens or external cover such as aluminum storm shutters. There are systems which can see through walls with amazing detail capability. There are systems being researched which will allow governments to monitor people in ways they likely never imagined. People can be tracked by tracking their cell phones. Using your cell phone a person can be located to within ten feet and their cell phone can be activated to listen to any noises or conversations within the ability of the microphone to detect. Even the cell phone camera can be activated though such is often not very revealing as if the phone is in a purse or pocket the video will not reveal much. There are ways to monitor people’s computer usage as long as their computer is linked to a network which has internet connection active or if the computer itself is connected to the internet. The invasions of our privacy which government can potentially utilize if they wish to monitor our lives covertly are astounding and place every individual potentially in a very compromised position even without their knowledge. These are simply implications of the modern world we all reside within. But then in a world where many of us post even intimate information about ourselves on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, Instagram, Vine and others, why would many of us complain or have any problem with the government monitoring our daily activities. Perhaps the government could start their own social media site and simply put videos of some of the craziest things they monitored and maybe also the top ten crimes of the day. The one prediction which can be made safely is that privacy is a quaint idea whose definition is growing ever smaller with every passing new technology. Perhaps any legal definition claiming that we have unalienable rights to privacy, that our homes are inviolable or that our papers, effects and private information are secure from search or seizure without a court order, summons or warrant are simply cute little ideas whose potential possibility is nil in our high-tech world where information rules and those who can best gather information rule. In simpler terms, if one wishes to have privacy they best be prepared to make a sizeable effort to assure that their desire has been attained. Thomas Jefferson once wrote, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” Perhaps this could be adapted to modern times where we add that not only is eternal vigilance is the price of liberty but also the price for personal privacy from government. It could be argued that privacy is necessary to have liberty and to have real freedom. To be honest, it is rightly well worth the effort and allows one to sleep better each night.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

September 24, 2013

Towson Common Core School Board Meeting Poses a Question

Most of you have already viewed the video of the intimidation and arrest of Robert Small for the horrific offense of asking an unapproved question at his School Board meeting concerning Common Core. Where many like myself are familiar with the changes which have occurred in our society and the implications and threats to our freedom and liberty but when you see it actually applied to this extent you are shocked into disbelief. You ask yourself whether this is your country any longer. If you have not seen the video of this offense against a citizen and overt abuse of authority, take a moment and view it here. I had my own set of experiences with the raw power which can be brought against a single citizen when I ran for the House of Representatives in Maryland’s Eighth District in the 2000 elections and was introduced to a series of state housing, building, and every other sort of inspector after the elections and the extreme extents the state would abuse the law to assist the two main political parties in order to prevent any challenge from somebody who had made it on to the ballot which is immediately seen as a threat. Seeing the brutal raw force used against Robert Small still shocked me as he was not a threat to anything other than the white washing and extreme effort by the School Board to avoid answering any actual questions about their already chosen implementation of Common Core.

 

There will be those who will claim that the rest of the people who were attending that meeting should have risen up and defended Robert Small and confronted the abuse of power by the state. They will say that the audacity of the person acting as security who also was an actual police officer when he displayed his badge expecting that Mr. Small would wilt and simply leave compliantly and when he stood his ground the officer used excessive force which may have caused actual injury and if so the State of Maryland, the county and the Towson School Board should all be sued into the same degree of submission which they applied extreme force in order to force Mr. Small into submission. As far as the rest of the people attending the meeting who did not rise to defend Mr. Small, would any of us done any differently if we had been there, and before you say yes, think hard about if you would really be the first person to come to Mr. Small’s aid and risk spending time in the county lockup until being brought before a judge the next day. The truth is we have all been trained in a way to be acquiescent and to defer to those in authority and believe me when I say that being the first to stand up for somebody else whom you do not know is not a natural act and takes great courage. For those among us who believe they would have such fortitude, I hope you never need test that belief and find yourself in such a situation because it is very frightening and unsettling. It takes a rare person who actually does not care for their own safety to some degree to rise against authorities, especially in a situation where you are on their turf, which these days is virtually anywhere.

 

How do I know that it is difficult and unsettling to stand against authorities? I have had some occasions where I had to invite county and state officials to kindly remove themselves from my property unless they could produce a search warrant. Some officers who work in some of our social services believe they are above such petty necessities as search warrants or warrants of any type and believe that their simple desire to inspect your home for suitability to raise a child is sufficient to gain them entrance. When you refuse to allow them entry they return remarkably quickly with a small band of State Troopers to demand they be allowed to complete their inspection. Fortunately one of the uniformed officers apparently was familiar with the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment in particular, and informed the not so nice lady that she really had no other choice other than going to a court to gain a warrant which he advised her she would very likely only anger the judge. This was easier than what the people in the School Board meeting faced as I was in my own house, not in a county building where they have right of ownership and dominion. Eventually, if things continue in the direction they have been sliding, we will all be faced with this choice at some point and likely sooner rather than later. The attempts to steamroll over the public making the citizenry submit to the powers of the state have grown in numbers and in scope. The extent in which government had encroached into our daily lives has become frightening. Watch the video of Robert Small’s simple desire to ask a question which had not been vetted or censored to assure its content would allow the state’s representatives to give an answer that served their purposes and ask yourself if this is something that shocks you or is it simply that Robert Small was out of line and deserved what he received. Mr. Small was initially charged with second degree assault on a police officer but the charges have since been dropped. The sole reason those charges were dropped was the video going viral, putting too much light on the actions of the state. Fascism works best in cold darkness of a silenced people.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.