On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Jim Crow <cornmash008@yahoo.com> wrote:
--- On Sat, 5/14/11, Paycheck-Piracy-list-owner@mail-list.com <Paycheck-Piracy-list-owner@mail-list.com> wrote:
From: Paycheck-Piracy-list-owner@mail-list.com <Paycheck-Piracy-list-owner@mail-list.com>
Subject: Indiana: Full Frontal Fascism
To: cornmash008@yahoo.com
Date: Saturday, May 14, 2011, 5:12 PM
Paycheck Piracy does not accept any liability or responsibility for
the information provided by others. It is your duty to verify the
accuracy and the legality of any information accessed via the
Internet.
Please note: This message was sent from an auto-notification system
that cannot accept incoming e-mails. Please do not reply to this
message.
Paycheck Piracy:
- Does not rent, sell, use or abuse the list of subscribers.
- Does not insert any ads nor pop-ups into your message.
- Does not send HTML email ('tracking' messages with different colors,
fancy fonts, or pictures).
- Does not track whether subscribers opened their email (requires HTML
email).
====================================
Prepare. Persist. Prevail.
http://www.preferredservices.org
Click here to subscribe to the free e-letter, Paycheck Piracy <mail
to: paycheck-piracy-on@mail-list.com>
====================================
Resent-From: tmds@mail-list.com
From: tmds-list-owner@mail-list.com
Date: May 14, 2011 05:39:58 AM PDT
Subject: Indiana: Full Frontal Fascism
Something very significant--and largely unreported--just happened
in Indiana. I just posted a rant about it here:
http://tinyurl.com/IndianaFascism
The plain text version of the article is below.
Larken Rose
larken@larkenrose.com
- -------------------------------
Indiana: Full Frontal Fascism
Something huge--huge and not good--just happened in Indiana, which
will be little more than a blip in the propaganda that passes for
national news. The Supreme Court of Indiana just ruled that in
Indiana, if a police officer decides to ILLEGALLY come into your
house, you're not allowed to do anything to stop him. According to
"Justice" Steven David, resisting an admittedly "UNLAWFUL police
entry into a home" is against "public policy." Got that? If you
live in Indiana, and a cop decides to invade your home without a
shred of legal justification, it is considered a CRIME for you to
do anything to stop him.
Bizarrely, "Justice" David also said that resisting law-breaking
cops goes against "modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence." You see,
only judges are wise enough to know that when the Fourth Amendment
says you have a right to be free from "unreasonable searches and
seizures," it actually means that the cops have the right to COMMIT
"unreasonable searches and seizures," and you have no right to do
anything to stop it.
Please allow me to toot my own horn here, by pointing out that
in my novel, "The Iron Web" (page 231), I predicted this step
occurring. It is an essential, major step towards totalitarianism,
for the control freaks to decide that even when they break their
own laws, their victims have no right to resist. There is a huge
PRINCIPLE at stake here, and what these three Indiana jackass
"judges" have just done is guarantee either complete totalitarianism,
or a bloody revolution (or both, in that order). Because this ruling
means, quite literally, that residence of Indiana have NO RIGHTS
AT ALL. What would it possibly mean to say you have a "right"
to not have your home illegally invaded by a jackbooted thug,
while also saying that you cannot do anything to defend that right?
Never fear, because, according to the Supreme Jackass Court of
Indiana, you can always come crawling to your masters, after you've
been illegally victimized by one of their jackboots, to beg for
some restitution. (Good luck with that.) "Justice" David says that,
AFTER you let the cop illegally invade your home, you can always
"protest the illegal entry through the court system." That's almost
straight out of my novel, where a new (fictional) law would "mak[e]
it a crime to forcibly resist any arrest, while also providing
legal remedies to those who have been subjected to improper arrest."
If anyone considers this reasonable, keep in mind that by the
exact same "reasoning" (and I use that term extremely loosely),
they might as well also rule that if a cop decides to shoot your
dog, or steal your car, or rape your wife, you have to quietly
stand by and LET HIM DO IT, and then later file a complaint, or a
lawsuit. In other words, the jackboots can do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING
THEY DAMN WELL PLEASE, "legal" or not, and your ONLY recourse is to
later whine to the very control freaks that the jackboots work for.
What was the rationale for this? In case all of the above
wasn't Orwellian enough, check this out. "Justice" David argued
that "allowing resistance [to law-breaking cops] unnecessarily
escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries
to all parties involved." Why wouldn't this psychotic reasoning
(a.k.a. "retroactive tyranny justification") also mean that if ANYONE
breaks into your house, or assaults you, or steals your stuff, or
otherwise attacks you, you'd better LET HIM DO IT in order to avoid
"escalat[ing] the level of violence"? Using DEFENSIVE violence to
combat AGGRESSIVE violence is completely justified and righteous,
notwithstanding the opinions of the tyranny apologists appointed
by the parasite class. If a cop illegally barges into your home,
you have every right to escalate the level of violence to any extent
necessary to stop him, including blowing the fascist's damn head off.
I'm glad I don't live in Indiana, because if some cop decided to
barge into my house without a shred of legal justification, I'd
now know that if I tried to hold him back, or push him out, I'd
be arrested and prosecuted. So I'd just have to shoot the bastard
instead. And since it's tough to do that sort of thing without anyone
noticing, I would then be a fugitive, for having DEFENDED my family
against an invading CRIMINAL. And if that much happened, and I was
forced to become a fugitive, I might feel obliged to go pay a visit
to the three stupid, tyrant-loving fascist jackasses on the Indiana
Supreme Court who just decided to declare it a CRIME for someone to
DEFEND HIMSELF against illegal trespassing, breaking and entering,
and assault, if the scumbag attacker happens to have a badge.
Hmmm, I have an idea. If there are any Indiana cops who still
respect the Constitution, please do your state a huge favor, and
go barge into the home of "Justice" Steven David--during supper
would probably be a good time. Barge in, without a warrant, and
without any legal justification, guns drawn, and start ordering
people around. See if "Justice" David does anything to resist. If
he does, lock his fascist ass up for violating his own idiotic
legal ruling. In fact, since he just declared it to be illegal
for him to resist your illegal invasion of his home, if he lifts a
finger to stop you, shoot the bastard, or at least give him a good
tasering. (That's exactly what happened in the case where "Justice"
David sided with the law-breaking cop.) After all, we can't just
let people assault police officers, now can we? If some Indiana
cop had the spine to do that, I know several thousand people who
would be thrilled beyond words.
Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com
(P.S. Incidentally, in U.S. vs. John Bad Elk, the U.S. Supreme Court
made it clear that resisting an unlawful arrest, even if doing so
requires killing the cop, can be legal. Whether this conflict between
the Supreme Court and the Indiana Nazi Brigade will be resolved
in court remains to be seen. But whatever any black-dress-wearing,
wooden-hammer-wielding narcissist says, if someone decides to barge
into your home, you have the right to evict him, with a harsh word,
a fist, or a 12-gauge--whichever you deem necessary.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe, send a blank message to tmds-on@mail-list.com
To contact the list owner, send your message to
tmds-list-owner@mail-list.com
mail-list.com 1302 Waugh Dr. #438 Houston, Texas 77019 USA
=============================================
No law compels a private-sector non-governmentally-privileged work eligible man or woman to submit a form W-4 or W-9 (or their equivalents), nor to obtain or disclose an SSN as a condition of being hired or keeping one's job. With the exception of an order from a court of competent jurisdiction issued by a duly qualified judge, no amounts can be lawfully taken from one's pay (for taxes, fees or other charges) without the worker's explicit, intentional, knowing, voluntary, written consent.
http://www.preferredservices.org/NonconsensualTaking.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a one-way announcement list. Only the list moderators are able to post a message.
To subscribe: <mailto:Paycheck-Piracy-on@mail-list.com>
To unsubscribe: <mailto:Paycheck-Piracy-off@mail-list.com>
To change your email address: <mailto:Paycheck-Piracy-change@mail-list.com> with your old address in the Subject: area
free archived files: http://archive.mail-list.com/paycheck-piracy
mail-list.com 1302 Waugh Dr. #438 Houston, Texas 77019 USA
To unsubscribe, or change your email address, click here.
http://cgi.mail-list.com/u?ln=paycheck-piracy&nm=cornmash008%40yahoo.com
This message was launched into cyberspace to cornmash008@yahoo.com
