Monthly Archives: January 2013

Ban Free Speech Now!

The American Engineer is now proposing that the freedom of speech be abridged in America. The pen is truly mightier than the sword. The damage that has been caused by freedom of speech has reached such a level that it cannot be tolerated any longer.

Press Abuses

  • Magazines, newspapers, and Hollywood have glorified smoking leading millions to lose their lives to lung cancer. Even worse, they took ad money from this industry and in the face of overwhelming science continued to glorify an activity that led to untold suffering and death. Today the press takes no responsibility for this evil.
  • Yellow journalists have manipulated the truth and exaggerated evidence leading America into wars that we had no business fighting, leading to the death of thousands.
  • Newspapers in the South reported positively on the actions of racists groups inciting thousands and leading to decades of black repression, lynching, and bombings.  US Newspapers have also praised fascists, covered up atrocities, and destroyed the reputations of true heroes in America and around the world.
  • New York’s Courier and Enquirer Newspaper published lurid rumors about abolitionists in 1834 leading to race riots and the mass destruction of black property and the property of their white supporters.
  • The New York Times’ Jayson Blair, CBS’ Dan Rather, and other journalists have been caught fabricating dozens of stories in attempts to push causes and bring down major political figures.
  • CNN actively sugar-coated stories about the brutal Dictator Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein, who fashioned himself after Josef Stalin, was one of the most brutal dictators of the late 20th century, killing thousands of his own people and gassing the Kurds.
  • Numerous mass murders have pointed to books and articles as their motivation to murder and often have this material in their possession at the conclusion of their rampage. Others copy-cat mass murders and have pointed to the excessive news coverage given to previous killers as their motivation to kill and achieve a type of perverse immortality.
  • The number of reporters and columnist  who claim to be impartial or at least independent but who are really activists or paid by political parties is a very long list.

 

Propose restrictions

Given the terrible abuses of the press, it is time we made the following limitations:

  1. There must be a waiting period before any article that references a subject that Congress has deemed dangerous, can be printed or transmitted.
  2. All journalists or opinion makers must register with the Federal Government. All journalists must be checked each year for mental health before being licensed to write.
  3. Since the 1st Amendment was written so that American could read about sports and where the best hunting spots are. all other sections of the newspapers will be banned as they are too dangerous.
  4. No journalists will be allowed to write more than 10 articles per month.
  5. No journalists will have their computer connected to the internet and the computer must be kept under lock and key when not in use.

Every time a tyrannical politician mentions a restriction on the right to bear arms, just replace it with the right to free speech. Without the right to bear arms there can be no free speech. Ironically, the pattern of tyrants never changes. They payoff or employ the press and confiscate the guns.

The Bill of Rights is one of the greatest gifts our Founding Fathers left us and the world. The Bill of Rights is the first 10 amendments to our Constitution. Today, there is a great assault against the Bill of Rights by the Democrats led by our self-proclaimed “Constitutional professor,” President Barack Obama. To its eternal shame, the American Press has not come out in defense of the 2nd Amendment as the Democrats attack it.

We often wonder why good men and women do not stand up in the face tyrants.  Well American Press, go look in the mirror! Now is your time to stand up. You are not only sitting down but you are also active in your hatred of the very document that guarantees your freedom. However, I suspect many of you have sold out your independence so you probably don’t value the 1st amendment either.

Let’s be clear …

The 1st Amendment states

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right  of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”

The Church of England was government controlled. The American people did not want government controlling religion because religion often plays a role in opposition to government tyranny as meeting place for the community and as a constant reminder that our rights come from God and not from a tyrant in the White House.

Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, the Freedom to Assemble, the Freedom to Petition are all aimed at preventing government tyranny.

The 2nd Amendment states

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Freedom to bears arms is NECESSARY for the security of a FREE state. The American Revolution began when the British sought to confiscate American weapons in Concord, NH. Gun confiscation is the trademark of Tyrants and tyrannical governments. Virtually all the nasty dictators in history used gun confiscation against their people before killing them by the millions.

The 3rd Amendment states

“No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

Once again, an amendment to prevent government tyranny!

The 4th Amendment states

“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.”

Once again, an amendment to prevent government tyranny!

….and on and on it goes.  Why does President and his leftist allies keep repeating the lie about the 2nd Amendment being the right to target shoot and hunt? Because they are tyrants.

So I leave you with this great poem …

True, This! —
Beneath the rule of men entirely great
The pen is mightier than the sword. Behold
The arch-enchanters wand! — itself is nothing! —
But taking sorcery from the master-hand
To paralyse the Cæsars, and to strike
The loud earth breathless! — Take away the sword —

States can be saved without it!

Edward Bulwer-Lytton in 1839 for his playRichelieu; Or the Conspiracy

 

 

Faith vs. Atheism II

 “Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings” -Famous Atheist Richard Dawkins

Dawkins statement is another take on the “Big Killer Religion” lie.  How may times have you heard “more people have been killed in the name of religion or God” as compared to any other reason?  Google has 75M pages  hits on that phrase and 8 different search suggestions. Substitute God for Atheism and the Google page hits drop to 4M and no search suggestions.

Check out the top 16 worst atrocities by annual killing rate of their own citizens since 1900. It is hard to imagine 8% of a population being killed each year. Yet that was Cambodia only 34 years ago. A good high school friend was a child who escaped the killing fields. Some of this data is out-of-date as I took it from a book written a while ago. By the way, the author was making the point that Democracies are safer than Totalitarian governments.  I added the religion of the totalitarian leader or of the leadership group to his chart.

Regime Year Start Year End Duration Government Type Religion of Leader Annual Rate Domestic Democide Midperiod Population
Cambodia (Khmer Rouge) 1975 1979 3.83 Communist Atheist 8.16% 2000000 6399000
Turkey (Ataturk) 1919 1923 4.08 Authoritarian Atheist 2.65% 703000 6500000
Yugoslavia (Croatia) 1941 1945 4.17 Communist Atheist 2.51% 655000 6250000
Poland (Post-WW II) 1945 1948 3.33 Communist Atheist 1.99% 1585000 23930000
China (Great Leap Forward) 1958 1961 4.00 Communist Atheist 1.22% 38000000 660000000
Turkey (Young Turks) 1909 1918 9.17 Authoritarian Secular 0.96% 1752000 20000000
Czechoslovakia (Post-WW II) 1945 1948 2.83 Communist Atheist 0.54% 197000 12916000
Mexico 1900 1920 21 Authoritarian Catholic 0.45% 1417000 15000000
USSR 1917 1987 71 Communist Atheist 0.42% 54769000 184750000
Cambodia (Samrin) 1979 1987 8.92 Communist Atheist 0.40% 230000 6478000
Uganda (Amin) 1971 1979 8.33 Authoritarian Islam 0.31% 300000 11550000
Angola 1975 1987 12.17 Communist Atheist 0.30% 125000 3400000
Romania (Carol/Michael) 1938 1948 10.08 Communist Atheist 0.30% 484000 16271000
North Korea 1948 1987 39.33 Communist Atheist 0.25% 1293000 13140000
Uganda (Post Amin) 1979 1987 8.75 Communist Atheist 0.20% 255000 14300000
Mongolia 1926 1987 61.17 Communist Atheist 0.19% 100000 873000

Atheists are just a small percentage of the world’s population. Do you think it is just coincidence they dominate the worst atrocities lists?  Nazi Germany would be on the list except they spread their (20+M) atrocities over many countries and this list is limited to Democide (Governments killing their own citizens).  Here is a list of the Nazi non-battle death count.  The Tutsi/Hutu Rwanda genocide would be added to this list if it was updated.

If the list correlated to the random human population, then Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and secular governments should dominate the atrocity list.

The following is an example of just how exposed we are to anti-religion propaganda. Every school child in the USA is taught about the 1692 Salem Witch Trials where twenty-five citizens of the Massachusetts colony were judicially killed and perhaps 150 were put on trial accused of being witches. Any information a student has forgotten on the Salem Witch Trials can be quickly accessed on his or her iPhone5 through a full multimedia website from National Geographic, twenty-eight published books, world class museums, and over one million Google searchable web pages. There is no theistic defense or rationalization for the Salem Witch Trials. Even though it happened 320 years ago, it still gets the full atheistic historical paparazzi treatment.

Now contrast the Salem black eye where religion was taken to fanatical extremes vs. the Holodomor. The Holodomor was when millions died at the hands of atheist ideology less than 100 years ago. The Great Leap Forward was when 38M+ Chinese who died about 50 years ago.  US students aren’t taught about these events.  Only if a 9/11 happens every day for the next 100 years would religion catch up with atheism in body count ! Repeat after me “Religion kills more people, religion kills more people, religion kills more people…”

 

Faith vs. Atheism

I just read an article on Richard Dawkins, atheist magical superstar, for the umpteenth time – uggh. Atheists are a rather silly lot. On one hand they proclaim a rigid adherence to “science,” yet on the other their core belief is so obviously unscientific. Allow me to explain Faith and Atheist real fast and real simple.

There is a universe. Matter, Energy, and Information don’t pop of thin air. Therefore something had to have created all of what we experience. Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. call that “something” God. Thus Genesis 1:1 states “In the beginning God created … .” God cannot be explained because God, by definition, is the answer to the question of what started it all. So asking the question “Who/What created God” is circular. The answer is God. God is the self-existent one. Faith is a belief in that Creator God that we cannot see and cannot understand.

People of faith are simply people who acknowledge they cannot comprehend the Creator but acknowledge God’s existence because they refuse to believe in magically created matter and energy. Faith is not only compatible with science, faith is the bedrock of Science. At the end of the day, ALL science, logic, math, etc. starts with a set of first principles that must be accepted in faith. This is not opinion – it is fact and Godel (buddy of Einstein)  proved it in his AWESOME incompleteness theorems.

So to me, an Atheist is just someone who believes in magic; that Matter, Energy, and Information can pop out of thin air. The natural laws confirm that matter and energy do not pop out of thin air. Thus atheism is scientifically wrong. Hard core atheists understand that matter, energy, and information must be spontaneously generated in order for atheism to be true. So major scientists, who happen to be atheist big shots like Sir Fred Hoyle, tried to come up with theories that matter and energy can pop out of thin air in a grand cosmic magic show. The result was they were horribly embarrassed by a couple of guys from Bell Labs, Penzais and Wilson. These atheists held such sway in the science community that these folks mocked and delayed research in the Big Bang Theory for decades. In fact, even the guys from Bell Labs were uncomfortable about publishing their results – such was the sway of the arrogant atheistic pricks in the respectable science community. That is something they don’t teach you in public school – atheist being wildly wrong.  Even the term, “The Big Bang” was an insulting term given to this theory that has stood the test of time by atheists!

Hoyle’s spontaneous matter generation theories went the same way as the atheist spontaneous life generation critics of Dr. Louis Pasteur. Yes, atheists were wildly wrong back in the day, another fact you won’t learn in public school. In fact I own an ancient book of those atheist attacking Dr. Pasteur. Aren’t we all glad that atheist did not win and now we have a high quality pure food supply? But being an atheist means being able to be wrong time and again. So today, modern atheists have come up with numerous alternative theories about how a universe can magically pop into existence. They are all wrong AGAIN. How do I know that? Well let’s test it scientifically with direct observation.

The test: Define 1 cubic mile of deep space where there is as close to a vacuum as possible and then observe it for 1 year. After 1 year, we can confidently say that 1 cubic mile of space for 1 year does not produce excess matter.

Then: We take 15 Billion cubic miles of deep space and observe all 15 Billion cubic miles. If no matter pops into existence in 1 year, then we can confidently say that 1 cubic mile of space for 15B years does not produce excess matter. Since the universe is 15B years old and we can now have high confidence that the universe did not magically appear as atheist would have us believe.

We use this type of parallel testing all the time in industry. When we test products we do not wait for the entire life of a product to determine if products will last 10 years or not. Instead, we fast age them and do lots of products in parallel to gain a “high level of confidence” that a product will last for it’s designed lifetime. There is an entire science of statistics that go into failure prediction and confidence. Most products we use today comply with industry standards that rely on these types of statistics.

This is just one test that proves with statistics that atheists are incoherent magic believers. There are many more science experiments and logical proofs that prove matter, energy, time, and information are not magical. It is a bit tiresome that after a couple of centuries of explosive growth in knowledge, there are still atheists loudly proclaiming that they know there is no God and that everything we see exists by magic.

Abortion Bullies

Ever since I began reading Ben Shapiro’s Bullies, I have started to notice examples of progressive bullying everywhere. In his book, Shapiro describes how leftist bullies attempt (often successfully) to silence their political opponents by unfairly demonizing them instead of discussing the actual issues. The President gave us a great example in his recent speech on gun control:

“There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists, publicly warning of a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty. Not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes they’ll do everything they can to block any common sense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.” – President Obama

Notice how he doesn’t even acknowledge that 2nd amendment supporters might have valid points. Instead, he demonizes them by assigning selfish motives without any evidence outside of the fact that they disagree with him.  Now that you understand what progressive bullying looks like, let’s see how it applies to the national conversation on abortion.

This week marks the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and over 55 million abortions in America in that time. This makes American abortion the 2nd largest genocide in the history of the world, second only to Mao’s 90 million or so. Like many Americans, I will be walking in protest of abortion on Saturday in one of the many Marches for Life across America. So I thought now is as good a time as any to warn my fellow pro-lifers about attempts to silence them and encourage them to not give in to abortion bullies.

As science has advanced, the wonders of life before birth are now seen in vivid detail with wide access to advanced ultrasound, successful pre-birth surgery, inter-uterine cameras recording every detail of development in research labs, and microscopes capturing the immediate change in an egg at the moment of fertilization. Life beginning at conception has been proven.This poses a problem for the pro-choice crowd as one of their go-to arguments has been that abortion doesn’t end a life; it’s just the removal of tissue. Salon.com writer, Mary Elizabeth Williams, admits this in her recent article entitled “So what if abortion ends life?” with tagline: “I believe that life starts at conception. And it’s never stopped me from being pro-choice.” In her article she explains how she and her other pro-choice friends never doubted that, when pregnant, they were carrying a human life: 

“Yet I know that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life….I have friends who have referred to their abortions in terms of “scraping out a bunch of cells” and then a few years later were exultant over the pregnancies that they unhesitatingly described in terms of “the baby” and “this kid.” I know women who have been relieved at their abortions and grieved over their miscarriages. Why can’t we agree that how they felt about their pregnancies was vastly different, but that it’s pretty silly to pretend that what was growing inside of them wasn’t the same? Fetuses aren’t selective like that. They don’t qualify as human life only if they’re intended to be born.”

While I appreciate her honestly in acknowledging that a fetus is in fact a life, I am deeply disturbed by her reasons for supporting abortion despite this fact. She states:

“In an Op-Ed on “Why I’m Pro-Choice” in the Michigan Daily this week, Emma Maniere stated, quite perfectly, that “Some argue that abortion takes lives, but I know that abortion saves lives, too.” She understands that it saves lives not just in the most medically literal way, but in the roads that women who have choice then get to go down, in the possibilities for them and for their families. And I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time — even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing.”

The life of the mother in this case actually means her ability to be free of her responsibility of carrying her baby to term. This is more important to Mary Elizabeth Williams than the actual life of the baby. She thinks life only has value if its wanted or intended and she doesn’t hesitate at the thought of killing life that is unwanted. Where does this value system lead if we follow it to its conclusions? An orphanage ought to be able to kill their orphans if they choose because they aren’t valued? Of course not and I’m sure Mary Elizabeth Williams would agree with me on that, but this is her proclaimed value system. She calls it “A life worth sacrificing” when in fact she doesn’t think the life has worth so it’s acceptable to sacrifice it on the altar of personal irresponsibility. She explains why framing the argument in life vs. death is a losing one for pro-choicers:

“Of all the diabolically clever moves the anti-choice lobby has ever pulled, surely one of the greatest has been its consistent co-opting of the word “life.” Life! Who wants to argue with that? Who wants be on the side of … not-life?….They believe that if we call a fetus a life they can go down the road of making abortion murder. And I think that’s what concerns the hell out of those of us who support unrestricted reproductive freedom.”

Exactly. But that’s what being pro-life is. We actually support allowing babies in the womb to live no matter what. And people advocating abortion are actually advocating for murder. This is not bullying by pro-lifers as Mary claims, “We still have passionate debates about the justifications of our actions as a society, but we don’t have to do it while being bullied around by the vague idea that if you say we’re talking about human life, then the jig is up, rights-wise.” It’s merely stating the pro-life position on the issue. Progressives pull the bully card all the time. They demonize their opponents by calling them name like “wingnuts” and accusing them of “browbeating” and “sneaky, dirty tricks” like in this Salon article, while claiming bullying simply because someone disagrees and fights for a different policy. Ironically, the point of the article is that you can admit that life begins at conception and still be solidly pro-choice but she congratulates Planned-Parenthood on their effort to move the conversation away from using terms like life:

“And in the midst of this unique moment, Planned Parenthood has taken the bold step of reframing the vernacular – moving away from the easy and easily divisive words ‘life’ and ‘choice.’ Instead, as a new promotional film acknowledges, ‘It’s not a black and white issue.'”

This issue is about life. More so than any other major issue in American politics today. Don’t let the abortion crowd ever tell you differently and don’t allow them to change the terms of the debate into a mess of muddled euphemisms like “reproductive rights.” You are pro-life in the truest sense of that term. Be proud of it.

Bonus: For a laugh watch the video at the end of the Salon article that encourages people to have discussions on abortion that are free from labels but goes on to explain why the pro-choice position is the right one. Also, if you have any good sign ideas for the March for Life post them in the comments!

– The Engineer’s Daughter

What’s more dangerous a Democrat or an Assault Weapon?

There are about 4M Assault Weapons in America. Assault weapons are rarely used to commit crimes because frankly they are big and easily noticed. It is hard to mug someone or to sneak into a 7-11 or Bank with an “Assault Weapon.”  There are many studies that show less than 3% of guns taken from criminals are assault style weapons and another study says that these weapons are just 1.7% of all guns in America.

The FBI reports that the total number of murders committed with rifles in 2011 is 323. A subset of rifles is the assault rifle … so the number of assault rifle deaths is quite low in a population of over 305,000,000 Americans.  For the sake of argument, let’s assume that 50% of the rifle deaths are due to assault rifles or 162.

So there is a 0.004% chance of being killed by an assault rifle this next year.

Let’s take the top 18 counties and/or cities in California with greater than 30% of the population registered as Democrats – this equals 3.5M people – not too far from how many assault weapons in the USA.

297 people were murdered in these California locations.

Thus the average person walking around in a heavily Democrat area is MORE than twice as likely to kill you as compared to an assault rifle. Democrats are more dangerous than assault weapons.

 

The data and locations.

3518024 297.3 0.0085%
West Hollywood
Inglewood
Santa Monica
Irwindale
Culver City
Carson
San Joaquin
Compton
Madera
Mariposa
Commerce
Shasta
Signal Hill
Pico Rivera
Malibu
South Pasadena
Alameda
Santa Fe Springs

 

 

Republican vs. Democrat Homicide

In The American Engineer’s continued research into homicide and mass killing in America, it is hard to escape the fact that the overwhelming majority of homicides occur in the same locations and that these locations have been run by Democrats for generations. So TAE took the voter registration % of Republicans and Democrats and compared it to the homicide rate in each California County with the exception of LA County.  Since LA County is so large (~25% of the state) we broke it down into individual cities.

Our research shows that if you want to improve your odds of not being a victim of a homicide, then you should move to an area with high Republican registration.  

In fact

  • Every California County or LA County city with a total Republican registration that reaches 25% of the population has a low homicide rate.
  • Our research proves that more Republicans STRONGLY correlates to a peaceful neighborhood.
  • In fact, just 11% of the population registering Republican correlates to a greatly reduced crime rate.

RepublicanHomocide

 

 

Now for a contrast let’s look at the same data for Democrats.  The graph below clearly shows that the greater the number of Democrats registered in a California County or LA County City the greater the Homicide rate. We don’t need gun control, we need Democrat Control — 5 day waiting periods before people are allowed to register as Democrats, more Democrat Safes (we call those jails), background checks for Democratic Politicians like Barack Obama :-)  — yes it is sarcasm, but the scientific data that says Democrats are far more dangerous unfortunately, is not.

DemocratHomicide

For those wanting a copy of the Excel File of the source data – please email info@mhreporter.com

Data was compiled from the LA Times, State and Local Voter Registar’s offices, and California States Department of Justice Crime Statistics.

TAE RELEASES MASS KILLINGS DATABASE

The American Engineer is releasing a database of 300 mass school and public venue killings over the past 100 years.  The list is by no means complete, but in our research following the Sandy Hook shooting we were having a tough time finding a single database of worldwide mass killings. Rather than wait many months for a more complete list – we decided to release the raw Excel file today to aid in research.  We’ll try to have a release each week.  Also, not all columns are not correct as the database grew in both length and columns as more events were uncovered.  We’ll continue to clean it over time.  Every time we look for more events they are easy to find so we suspect this list will grow by 10x.  I stopped the research for a while because it is very depressing reading the stories.  Some of the stories are so beyond horrible that even a death penalty doesn’t seem to be justice enough … I’ve not listed the details in most cases.  Deaths in some major genocide events have not been included yet – due to the number of events – we’ll try to get those later.

A couple of trends do pop out when reviewing the data – some are a little surprising, but most are not.

  1. Governments and their political opponents are by far the worst killers of school age children. Although their actions are the worst in terms of numbers they are far more infrequent and are often associated with a larger conflict.
  2. Mentally disturbed people as expected are a problem.  The most recent wave of killers have usually been influenced by death metal music and anti-Christian rhetoric.  It is common for the friends and relatives to discuss the odd behavior of the killer using words like “quiet”, “strange”, “dark”, etc.
  3. Killers come from across the racial spectrum.  Asians, Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics have all participated in mass murdering.
  4. Most killers are male as expected.  A surprising numbers of killers either worked in government or if younger their parents worked in government.
  5. Serial killers prefer strangulation, poison and other non-kinetic forms of killing.  Whereas Mass killers on single day shootings have preferred guns, dynamite, truck bombs, etc.
  6. Gang violence deaths and injuries are far more numerous than mass shooting death and injury.
  7. Copycat crime is a serious issue.  The violent mentally ill or just pure evil folks often admire other killers or seek the same publicity.  This is especially noticeable in the Chinese school attacks.  It is unfortunately unusual for a famous US serial killer or US mass murderer to not be copied within five years.

Here is the Mass killings List Rev1.0 list in Microsoft Excel format.

John McDonald

Example:

shootings

aaronswartz-300x189

SOPA fighter Aaron Swartz dead

Aaron Swartz was the founder of Reddit and a fighter for civil liberties. He is reported to have committed suicide. Aaron’s political viewpoint came from the far left, yet he was a man of principal. He believed in a free internet and the freedom of speech. When our US Government attempted their attack on internet freedom (with the bills that ultimately became SOPA “the Stop Online Piracy Act”),  Aaron and small group of like-minded young civil liberties activists set out to stop them.  Like the Patriots of the past, they succeeded despite extremely long odds.  Demand Progress website.

When Americans demand that Congress compromise and “get things done,” I always remind them to be careful what you wish. The worst legislation that passes Congress are bills on which both sides immediately agree. SOPA was a prime example of a strong bipartisan attack on civil liberties.

Most people rightfully support online copyright protection. For example, if an artist makes a movie or performs a song, then they should be paid for the use of it over a reasonable period time. If a citizen makes a home video that includes the song playing in the background, then should the artist be paid, should the internet company who provides access to this video be sued for piracy? Should an internet company providing ads for an illegal product, i.e. prescription drugs from Canada be sued for aiding criminal behavior?

SOPA was about keeping people stupid — not about copyright. Government loves to pass laws that prevent the public from seeing how we are getting screwed. Thus they don’t want you to see prescription drugs ads from Canada that offer lower costs than the same drug in the USA. As a result, they sue companies that have a financial incentive to show you this information. Google had to pay $500M for displaying Canadian drug ads in US Markets! This is just one example of the chilling effect on speech. Note; for all the Republican blabber about free trade, there is no free trade in prescription drugs from Canada.  Note; for all the Democrat blabber about low cost medicine, there is no Democrat push for lower prescription drugs from Canada.

SOPA was about keeping people under control — not about copyright. Our Government has learned to pass lots of laws and then selectively apply them as they see fit or feel embarrassed. The people stop getting alarmed at onerous laws passing because they are not affected by the law. President Obama regularly says he is not going to enforce this law or that law.  His most recent statement was regarding not enforcing the Federal Drug Laws on pot. You may agree or disagree with the Federal Drug Law, but that is not my point. The point is law, selectively applied for political purposes, is not the Rule of Law – it is tyrannical. For example, our tax code is so complicated that probably most Americans unknowingly violate some portion of it. Thus our Government can come into any family with threats and intimidation based in selectively applied law. SOPA was one of these laws that would cause a lot of normal internet activity to be deemed illegal. Of course, the government would not enforce these laws unless a person caused some embarrassment – just another tool in the hand of the tyrant.

More recently, Aaron Swartz was in trouble from the Government because he had “illegally” downloaded 4.8 million technical papers from a database called JSTOR. He was facing 35 years in prison and $1M in fines. I bet JSTORs is pretty much screwed now – as I doubt anyone of integrity would use their site. We can only hope that organizations like JSTOR goes the way of the dinosaur.

I read at least a hundred technical papers a year – not using JSTOR anymore.  Aaron was making a really good point with his actions. Freedom of Speech has been protected by the courts since the Bill of Rights however if speech is “copyright”ed, then speech can be controlled. What large companies and pseudo-governmental organizations have figured out is:  if they copyright everything then they can restrict information. There is no reason that millions of research papers should be behind a pay wall when taxpayers paid for most of the research. Copyrights need to be restricted to items that actually contain private sector intellectual property and violations of copyright need to be restricted to those that are willfully infringing. They should NOT be broad sweeping laws that shutdown legitimate activity or restrict information from the public that should never have restricted in the first place.

“Private – public partnerships should not be used to prevent tax payers from seeing the research they paid for. Often, not-for-profit organizations are used to facilitate this fraud on the American people. These Non-profits take money from the public sector, are started by the public sector, yet restrict their information from citizens — how many times are we supposed to pay for same information?”

Ironically, our government has learned how to restrict public information by using copyright law that is traditionally intended to protect the intellectual property rights of private industry. For example, when MH Reporter used the logo of MHCSD to announce an MHCSD meeting, we were contacted by the MH attorney telling us to stop using it due to copyright issues. This is just one more example of power thirsty government. I apologize in advance for MHCSD attorney fees that likely reached into the hundreds of dollars that were spent to generate that letter.

Well let’s hope something good can from this tragedy and that the legacy of Aaron Swartz will live on in the fight against our Government’s attack on the first amendment.  Let’s also hope those same civil right’s activist will remember that the 2nd amendment is the real protection for the 1st amendment.