informationliberation
The news you're not supposed to know...




An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand Everything
The Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires
The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility

The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes Off
Operation Gladio: The Hidden History of U.S. Sponsored False Flag Terrorism in EuropeThe New American Century: The Untold History of The Project for the New American Century
(more)
Article posted Sep 08 2011, 3:35 PM Category: Commentary Source: Wendy McElroy Print

Passport to the Total State

by Wendy McElroy

"It is the mandatory nature of any travel document that converts it into a violation of rights."

"Your papers!" In old movies, the demand is barked at trembling travelers by a Nazi with a guttural accent. If the demand is made in the opening scene, then the audience knows immediately that they watching a totalitarian state in which travelers are in danger.

"Your papers!" now rings out at every American airport and border crossing. The accent is different but travelers need to recognize with equal immediacy that a totalitarian state is playing out in front of their eyes, and they must be careful.

A passport is where the security theater begins. Indeed, without a passport those who wish to fly or cross a border are not "allowed" to be scanned, searched, interrogated, or undergo a plethora of other indignities imposed by uniformed thugs. The hoops through which passport carriers jump are all prelude to "permitting" them to exercise a right belonging to every freeborn person: the right to travel.

America and the world were not always this way. It is important to remember that there once was a world in which people traveled freely across borders without paperwork to visit families, pursue education, conduct business, and mingle. Freedom worked once. It enriched the world economically, culturally, and psychologically.

War Converts Convenience into Blatant Abuse

The modern "passport" is commonly defined as, "an official document issued by a government, certifying the holder's identity and citizenship and entitling them to travel under its protection to and from foreign countries." But are passport privileges to be conferred or denied by government, or are they mere conveniences that cannot be properly required for people to exercise the natural right to freedom of movement? Do they protect peaceful travelers or merely facilitate the state's grip on the flow of people and property?

The foregoing descriptions of passports have all been true at some point in history.

Travel papers date back to antiquity and were generally intended to protect the bearer as he passed through foreign territory. The King James Bible (Nehemiah 2:7) states,
I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah.
In some areas, the issuance of letters also served as social control. According to Wikipedia, "In the medieval Islamic Caliphate, a form of passport was used in the form of a bara'a, a receipt for taxes paid". Those in arrears could not travel even within the Caliphate.

Henry V (1386–1422) is credited with creating the first Western passport, which was "designed to help prove who you were if you travelled to a foreign land" and to facilitate entry into the many walled cities of Europe. Indeed, the word "passport" is thought to derive from passing through the "porte" (doorway) of such cities. Unlike most earlier letters, however, the ones issued by Henry V were a general identification and did not specify which locations the bearer could visit.

The passport as an official permission or protection, and not merely as identification, arose because of armed conflicts. In the 17th century, sea voyaging was key to trade, travel, and the maintenance of empire. With some frequency, war interrupted that flow. Therefore, neutral vessels were granted passports or "sea letters" from a port of departure, which permitted them to journey in safety. (This is an alternate but less accepted theory of the derivation of the word "passport.") Civil authorities also issued "safe conducts" to individuals; typically, the individual was a subject of one of the belligerents who needed to cross enemy territory. Many 17th-century treaties — e.g., the Treaty of the Pyrenees (1659), the commercial Treaty of Copenhagen (1670) — make prominent mention of safe conducts, the violation of which was punished as a serious offense against international law.

The American Passport

The American passport was also rooted in war, specifically the American Revolution (1775–1783). The first one was issued in 1783; based on the French "passport," it was designed and printed by Benjamin Franklin. It was a single page with a description of the bearer(s) and his or their signature(s). For example, when John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay acted as ministers plenipotentiary in traveling to Great Britain to seal the terms of peace, all three names were on one passport. It was addressed "TO ALL Captains or Commanders of ships of war, privateers, or armed Vessels …"

During the Articles of Confederation period (1783–1789), passports were issued but not required. When the US Constitution was ratified, creating a new government, passports continued to be issued but not required. Many American states and cities also issued their own "voluntary" passports until 1856 when the Department of State exerted a federal monopoly, ostensibly to eliminate confusion.

Nevertheless, passports were not mandatory except for a period during the American Civil War (1861–1865) and during World War I (1914–1918). The latter can be seen as the beginning of the current American passport. On December 15, 1915, President Woodrow Wilson issued Executive Order No. 2285, "[r]equiring American citizens traveling abroad to procure passports" and advising the
Secretary of State, in co-operation with the Secretary of the Treasury, will make arrangements for the inspection of passports of all persons, American or foreign, leaving this country.
This was followed in 1918 by an act of Congress granting the president authority to require passports during time of war. Passports remained mandatory until early 1921.

Thereafter, the United States continued its "no-passport-required" travel policy until another war: World War II (1939–1945). In 1941, passports became mandatory for travel abroad and remain so to this day. (Travel to Canada used to be an exception; until recently, proof of citizenship was all that was required to cross the border.)

European Passports

European nations pioneered many if not most aspects of the modern passport. In his review of the book The Invention of the Passport: Surveillance, Citizenship, and the State by John Torpey, Albrecht Funk (Department of Political Science, University of Pittsburgh) wrote,
He [Torpey] starts with the hectic endeavors in the French revolution to issue passports and identification papers that tried to secure the free movement of the citoyen on the one hand and, on the other hand, kept the movements of those who were perceived as enemies of the revolution, under surveillance, (aristocratic émigrés, insurrectionists of the Vendee, foreigners).
Here is the blatant use of passports to exert social control by refusing travel to "enemies of the state."

But Europe differed from America in a key manner: a landmass with many nations, it relied on the trade and the travel of skilled workers across borders. By the mid-19th century, mandatory passports had largely disappeared, with Czarist Russia and the Ottoman Empire being prominent exceptions. The change was largely due to three factors. First, governments were pressured to open up borders so that goods and services could flow across an increasingly industrialized Europe. Second, the period between the last Napoleonic War (1815) and World War I was unusually peaceful. Third, railroads now dominated travel. Their speed and the sheer number of travelers made traditional methods of checking documents impractical.

Thus, with trade and peace, mandatory passports declined.

War brought them back to life. With World War I, European nations once more imposed requirements not only to identify "enemies of the state" (e.g., spies or the citizens of belligerents) but also to control the outward flow of skilled labor in order to maintain their own workforces. In short, passports once again became social controls and, like the United States, many European nations maintained their requirements after the War.

World War II made passports mandatory on a virtually worldwide basis. Although passport requirements loosened once more after the WWII, the war on terror in the wake of 9/11 has raised those requirements to unprecedented levels. The ebb and flow of passports is that of war itself.

Human Right or Social Control?

Passports clearly function as an essential and effective means through which a state can control the person and property of its residents. Consider the United States. No one can legally leave without one.

And yet passports can be denied for a myriad of reasons that have nothing to do with being "an enemy of the state" but rest strictly on statutory grounds. Common reasons for denial include owing money to the IRS, a federal arrest, a state-criminal court order existing, a drug arrest, being on parole or probation. Law-enforcement databases are routinely checked against both passports and applications to weed out those who have committed such offenses as being more than $2,500 behind on child-support payments. Passports can also be revoked for several reasons, although revocation is far less common.

Those who meet the legal requirements for a passport move on to the next stage of social control. After handing over documents, a traveler is questioned about the reasons for travel, how much money he carries, his occupation, and virtually any other question a border agent wishes to ask. The traveler's person and property are "searched" in various ways, including a strip search at the agent's discretion. If the traveler questions or evinces disapproval, then he could be denied the "right" to board a plane, thus wasting an expensive ticket. Or he may be pulled aside for special treatment, including fines or interrogation by the police.

A question remains, however: do passports necessarily violate human rights? If passports are entirely voluntary and those who refuse them bear no punishment, then clearly they do not violate human rights. They are a useful form of identification that a businessman who needs to definitively identify himself to banks in several nations might welcome. It is the mandatory nature of any travel document that converts it into a violation of rights.

With the exception of trespassing on private property, people have an absolute right to travel in peace and at their own discretion. This right is an extension of self-ownership, which is the basis of libertarianism. Self-ownership means that all human beings, by virtue of being human, have a right to the full and peaceful control of their persons and property. Traveling is nothing more than an expression of that control not only over your body but also over your goods, which may require transport. Requiring a passport as the key to freedom of movement is akin to gagging someone while maintaining that he retains freedom of speech.

Denying a passport violates self-ownership in yet another manner: either every human being is a self-owner or none are. Forbidding travel to some creates an unequal society, which violates the very concept of self-ownership. It creates secondary citizens who can reclaim their status only by complying with state demands, such as the payment of child support. This sleight of hand converts a right into a state-granted privilege to be doled out to the obedient.

Conclusion

The passport has grown into what is arguably the single most powerful tool of totalitarian America, second only to law enforcement itself. It no longer pretends to protect individuals; not a single terrorist has been apprehended as a result of passport checks. But it does cement the totalitarian state. The mandatory passport should be reviled and rejected as an abuse of human rights and common decency. A nation that requires one cannot be free.
__
Wendy McElroy is the author of The Reasonable Woman: A Guide to Intellectual Survival (Prometheus Books, 1998). She actively manages two websites: http://www.ifeminists.com and http://www.wendymcelroy.com. For additional articles on current events by Ms. McElroy, please visit the Commentary section of our website.





Latest Commentary
- No Rose Can Mask the Stench of Obama's Tyranny
- Tyranny is Infinitely More Obscene than Naughty Words
- Arrest Obama Under NDAA For Supporting Terrorists in Syria
- Public Enemy Number One: The Public
- Obama's Amerika: The Land of Mao and Lenin, not Madison and Jefferson
- Why No Perjury Indictment for Clapper?
- If Edward Snowden Is a Criminal, Why Aren't the Rest of Us Criminals As Well?
- America's New Normal: Mass Surveillance, Secret Courts and Death to Whistleblowers









Comments 1 - 17 of 17 Add Comment Page 1 of 1
Dave

Posted: Sep 09 2011, 8:54 AM

Link
passports are censorship, division of knowledge being core to control.

<... second only to law enforcement itself.>

people do what they are told because of enforcement, people don't want to abused, tortured and murdered. that is division of people into two and maintenance of the division.

some people seeing what terrible things are done wonder 'why do they hate us'. when people are employed as oppressors, there is a hard divide that exists by virtue of the oppression and doing terrible things to the oppressed. the oppressors have to deny that they are human beings torturing other human beings and torture all the more to maintain denial of what they have become.
Dave

Posted: Sep 09 2011, 9:00 AM

Link
then there is what i call plato's paradox, that oppressors must deny reality to deny what they are doing and the oppressed must deny reality for the unbearable discomfort this is. if someone wants to go round presenting reality, removing blinkers, this can threaten people's fake comfort.

for deciders to manipulate a plato world (compartmentalised, organised etc) where people are making relative decisions in a restricted context, alterations are made through theatre, theatrics like blowing stuff up, ie 'news' in the media rather than the 'old and new' that people can see where they are being led.

in the natural world, things combine to more complex things, the human being an example. in simple algebra perhaps x + y = z. in politics, the outcome is the start so one has political change = pf(x + y) where pf is what is done, the political function. that is put in 'alice in wonderland' as 'sentence first'. talking of which 'david cameron' was reported by the 'bbc' of saying that 'the old bailey is not big brother'. i see that as deliberatedly a precise contradiction.
Dave

Posted: Sep 09 2011, 9:15 AM

Link
i use the term to myself 'protocols of power', it is a way round people not wanting to see reality as it would mean acknowledging the farse of their life (too much trauma). instead of the pain of removing blinkers, one can just set up a new communications channel that tunnels through the blinker. the filter can be as simple as 'does it serve power?' when installed the unconscious will raise alerts when potentially politics in progress.

passport yes, police yes.

say with the catholic church and no condoms, does this serve power? it serves membership of the catholic church, poverty, oppression, war etc.

with the jewish religion, the religion according to some passes through the mother. does that serve power. i see it does, it is easier to know who the mother is to maintain segregation and power. statists might think in terms of dna and fingerprints, complete nonsense as they are not doing the testing (sentence first).
Dave

Posted: Sep 09 2011, 9:29 AM

Link
despite all the censure and in the case of the crown global passport tracking, a cnn article has raised questions that require no filter, ie what speaks sense:

<Are jobs obsolete?
...
And so the president goes on television telling us that the big issue of our time is jobs, jobs, jobs -- as if the reason to build high-speed rails and fix bridges is to put people back to work. But it seems to me there's something backwards in that logic. I find myself wondering if we may be accepting a premise that deserves to be questioned.
...
The only ones losing wealth were the aristocracy, who depended on their titles to extract money from those who worked. And so they invented the chartered monopoly. By law, small businesses in most major industries were shut down and people had to work for officially sanctioned corporations instead. From then on, for most of us, working came to mean getting a "job."

The Industrial Age was largely about making those jobs as menial and unskilled as possible. Technologies such as the assembly line were less important for making production faster than for making it cheaper, and laborers more replaceable. Now that we're in the digital age, we're using technology the same way: to increase efficiency, lay off more people, and increase corporate profits.>
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/09/07/rushkoff.jobs.obsolete/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
L.S.

Posted: Sep 10 2011, 1:22 AM

Link
Dave, a few days ago, my son recieved a referral at school for "citizenship." Usually, referrals are given as forms punishment, or to document insubordination, but not anymore so it seems....

I didn't even have to say it; before I could so much as think it, Richard said: "I know mom -- Newspeak." I did ask him, if he realized that them keeping track of his good behavior, is almost worse than them keeping track of his misbehavior? He told me that he's just "trying not to be noticed but it's not working!"

Around 3 weeks ago, his school changed principals, and with this change, came a new set rules; that I haven't seen, but they were made known to the children. Two of these "new rules," were told to me by Richard, the first: no more eating outside and second: no more sodas on school grounds.

He didn't tell me of the rules immediately, but he waited until this week. When I asked the reason for this... I'm not even sure I would have come up with his response; as follows:

"I wanted to wait until we took the Benchmark Test." (I asked: why?) "Because we're being punished for nothing, and the only thing the teachers care about are our test scores, so, I failed mine on purpose -- even though I knew all of the answers." (What? Why? I asked again.) "Because I'm in all honor's classes, and I brought my entire classes' score down to the 59th percentile. Maybe when they figure out that I'm doing this on purpose -- they'll wonder why. and then, I will tell them it is because of the new principle's rules."

I just laughed and told him, that he had better not enlist any other students in his scheme.
Dave

Posted: Sep 10 2011, 9:52 AM

Link
"Until they became conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious. - 1984"

it would seem your son is already there
Dave

Posted: Sep 10 2011, 10:03 PM

Link
there is a media blizzard via the bbc here. i heard recently from the beezlebub
1. terror alert in washington
2. child abuser jailed
3. david cameron was looking at removing benefit from those children who failed to attend school

the first two points are top propaganda (emotional triggers), organised politics is based on terror and child abuse, it is perpetuating for both for gov to claim to oppose them. applying similar context evaluation to point 3, in an economic dictatorship david cameron is effectively saying 'either you hand over your children for brainbusting (child abuse) or we will kill your family'.

smacks of desperation but we are at that stage.
Dave

Posted: Sep 10 2011, 10:10 PM

Link
this was all in the context of a blizzard of distraction and cover up of what is really being done (i heard the coded messages going out), the smokescreen being remembrance for 9/11, ie similar to 'remember remember the 11th of september. no mention of the fbi bombing of the wtc in 93 and all manner of historical rewrites and nonsense going out in a flood. as i say, cover up in progress.

if you can have people worshipping the dead while controlling the historical record, you control past, present and future, as documented in 1984. an american commenter, an operator was saying how the british do it much better, they get to the memorials faster. ww1 was the war to end all wars, ww2 was to be the war fit for heros, many posthumous ones.

the british script is elegant:

<They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them. - Laurence Binyon>
Dave

Posted: Sep 10 2011, 10:15 PM

Link
as the public are witness, we are in a phase of reclamation of colognies at the moment during a funeral. should we be looking after the living, doesn't everything then follow from there?

i have a question for you LS as you seem to know history. the american operator said something like 'it was the first time invaded since 1912'. the bbc chap didn't seem to know what he meant and said 'who was that'. there was a pause, nothing said and the bbc commentator said 'oh' and carried on with the nonsense stuff. i am aware of some constructs going down in 1912 but did britain invade then?
Dave

Posted: Sep 10 2011, 10:37 PM

Link
also, have you or your son seen V for Vendetta. it includes old political narratives but with updates relevant to current political agendas. it starts with the US gone, america offering british people grain and tobacco but politians oppose as one would expect. at the end people who one is given the view are dead are not dead as masks are removed. in the case of the film it is remember remember the 5th of november. some of it is being played out on the global stage now, bbc etc.

as a programmer incidentally, i worked on the government's cattle tracing program, i described it at the first meeting as something the mod were up to and to hide where livestock came from. those present said nothing as though a strange thing to say, the devil was in the detail and i had to read all the official guff.

human passports give dictatorship powers, it is incredibly dangerous to exist at all. with biometrics there is stand off identification, retinal scans being in the film as is to some extent the remote acquisition of public opinion. from some of the bbc message changes over time recently it seemed to me that reality control is on the jitter, ie loss of control, either that or deliberately trying to expose itself.
L.S.

Posted: Sep 10 2011, 11:34 PM

Link
The commentator likely misspoke, and meant to say: "since 1812."

Roosevelt took office in 1901 -- this is the first British invasion, that i'm aware of during the 1900's.

I rarely watch t.v. but I will make it a point to pick up the movie you've suggested.

I'm only on the facebook around once every 3-4 months, but I have been getting a feel for the "life energy," (I think this is what you called it...) that wrote is in the U.S. Although you have an aversion to the "hope" word... I thought it may please you to know, that many people I have talked with, are becoming very aware of the BBC's global-enslavement-plan.

The information that was most shocking to me, came from a high-school kid; who not only seemed to have a better grasp on the history than I do, but he said that all of his friends know about the plan, and they can spot the day-to-day-lies.
This took place while I was shopping for my kid's clothes, and the young man was one of the clerks. I thought wow, if people are so openly talking about this, then perhaps.... (Actually, I've never tried to imagine beyond this point.)
Dave

Posted: Sep 11 2011, 11:18 PM

Link
if we split the difference, say 1903, this an account of a mining village:

<The entire village was owned and run by the company, the houses, the shops, the church, the pub. It knew how much its miners drank, whether they were religious, which of their children were causing trouble on the streets, how much individual families spent on food and whether their credit status was good or bad at the local shop. It even had its own police force to round up children playing truant from school, and drunken miners at closing time at the pub. Owning the only public house in the village gave the company a profitable monopoly over drinking. As one miner commented ruefully to a colliery policeman who had taken charge of him for being drunk and disorderly. "This is a funny place, first we go to the pit office to get the money, then the Company gives us a place where we can pay the money back to it, and then, when the money's gone it provides you to take care of use.>

from village to global village.
Dave

Posted: Sep 12 2011, 9:41 AM

Link
<but he said that all of his friends know about the plan>

what is not so obvious is what people are actually living in and as a consequence who they are. they have that in the film i mentioned, some line about you wear the mask for so long you end up believing it.

for control systems one needs some kind of grouping/class system so there is downward pressure. as a consequence likely each of us is living in a fake context where though we can see outside it, it is less easy to see ourselves in it. to look around what one is actually living in brings much into view, in my case i found pretty much just a mountain of nonsense.

in the book i quoted from most is not in the lines but it is about aristocracy, a construct that clearly involved a great deal of thought and a great deal of effort in maintenance. they are deep in the prisoner position, all the more so despite the priviliges. behind the protocols and facade a complete farce. they might well want to throw away the masks more than anyone as farce in a prison system is a tragedy.

<In theatre, a farce is a comedy which aims to entertain the audience by means of unlikely, extravagant, and improbable situations, disguise and mistaken identity, verbal humour of varying degrees of sophistication, which may include word play, and a fast-paced plot whose speed usually increases, culminating in an ending which often involves an elaborate chase scene.>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farce
Dave

Posted: Sep 12 2011, 9:53 AM

Link
<Passport to the Total State>
i suspect it would take something like one phone call for all the passport nonsense to disappear.

<if people are so openly talking about this, then perhaps.... >
that makes that call more likely if not unnecessary. the nazi stuff is a serious act but if enough people are conscious and see through the act the stage falls apart.
L.S.

Posted: Sep 12 2011, 4:35 PM

Link
Energy drinks were placed on the fictitious list of contraband too. I usually don't let Richard drink these things, but he begged me to buy him one, for the sole purpose of taking it to school today.

I warned him, that if were made to dispose of it, and he refused to do so, that this would be considered an act of insubordination. He said: "I know -- that's why I'm going to tell them, that you bought it for me, and there is no rule in the handbook that says I can't drink it here. So keep your cell phone with you today -- just in case."

Seeing as it's past his lunch period... He either decided against drinking it, went unnoticed while drinking it, or drove them off with the threat of "mommy."

I wish he would have waged the battle over the banning from eating outside. The subsidizing of corn, plus the BPA, that comes along with the drinking of sodas and energy drinks, is reason enough for me to ban the both in my house. But, I'm doing my best to let him find his own way through this madness.
Dave

Posted: Sep 12 2011, 9:46 PM

Link
as far as the youth of the day go, 'hal' (btn in V for vendetta) allows for global deconstruction, construction, synchronisation, it is intensive and being targeted at the youth of the day.

there would be leakage to parents but they get b*lls*t bbc and similar. they have now presented to the people the topic 'new money system' with public completion date of 2019. the adult media presentations are being rapidly globalised and for trauma stories, ie keep shocking the monkey. in v for vendetta they use the term reclamation, the empire deconstructing and reconstructing the colognies. the word 'jubilee' perhaps of relevance.

as for 1912, i might have misheard, what i have heard of digital radio is crap. i have limited access to new data, as the whole of britland is a conspiracy project wholesale reverse engineering my own life was useful.
i project and as far as the digital matrix goes i would be surprised if AI couldn't fake anything at the AV presentation level. i see a mobile phone marketed with a butterfly i presume likely an mkultra phone. in the V film the only records of some radiation experiment available were financial records, similar with mkultra itself in revealing the lsd dosages.
Dave

Posted: Sep 12 2011, 10:26 PM

Link
trauma journalism

not long ago the news kept having parts of a video speeded up. i thought likely a timeline was under pressure and they were calling for max speed the media being used for military coms as well as well as being open. books are often of this nature, to communicate different things to different people as applies to the bible and 1984 etc.

in the book 'black diamonds' we are told king george V wanted to visit his european cousins but with the miners in crisis, 2IC of the church of england (cosmo lang - archbishop of york) recommends he does a visit to the miners. his first item on his visit list is a child who had some artificial limbs delivered to him in advance (a similar stunt being repeated by john major in relation to iraq). the king stays at the manor i referred to, at 03:30 there is mining explosion. we are told the work detail at the mine wasn't as usual (ie mulitiple special op indicators including the number 33). later there is another explosion taking out the rescue workers, resonant to dresden, 9/11. the king gets to express sympathy to the miners, pr complete except for a stop at a house in a model village where he spends time in the house as if a random stop. the house number is 33, the book describes that number as nondescript:

"It was William Brown's, bearing the prosaic number 33, and the aristocratic address of The Park. Yet it was only a miner's cottage."

recently we had a mining issue, 33 miners trapped we were told. the rescued miners not being happy with the keep silent dictat we entertained by british football teams. voices in the guardian newspaper weren't impressed, a news story requires trauma and with no dead bodies it didn't quality. another mining story appears with deaths.

introducing cattle passports had the bse crisis, i presume for passports it needed a war.
Comments 1 - 17 of 17 Page 1 of 1


Add Comment
Name
Comment

* No HTML


Verification *
Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below
 


PLEASE NOTE
Please see our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.

About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



Advanced Search
Username:

Password:

Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Register

Edward Snowdens father: If we sacrifice our freedoms due to terrorism the terrorists have already won - 06/17Louisiana: Cops Used Red Light Cameras For Personal Profit - 06/17Is Encryption Effective Against Snooping? German Government Says No, Snowden Says Yes - 06/18Jail Guards Turn Women's Prison Into Their Personal Sex Dungeon - 06/17Public Enemy Number One: The Public - 06/17If You've Got Nothing To Hide, You've Actually Got Plenty To Hide - 06/17The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You - 06/17Eyewitnesses describe the terror of DWI checkpoint shooting - 06/17

Cop Who Karate Chopped NY Judge In Throat Gets Off Scot-FreeFlorida Cop Smashes Compliant Woman's Face Into Car -- "Maybe Now You Can Understand Simple Instructions"VIDEO: Lapel Cam Reveals A Day In The Life Of A U.S. Police Officer (Tasing, Beating, Breaking & Entering, Stomping On Heads... and Laughing About It)Caught On Tape: Officer Sucker Punches Inmate In Face, Files Report Claiming 'Self Defense'Insult Person On Twitter, Go To JailSWAT Team Brings TV Crew To Film Raid Against Threatening Internet Critic -- Raids Innocent Grandma InsteadCop Karate Chops NY Judge In The ThroatWhen the Right to Resist Becomes the "Duty to Submit"
(more)

 
Top