Sunday, March 15, 2015
Saturday, March 7, 2015
I Was one of the State Police Officers in Selma's Bloody Sunday March - Former Alabama state trooper James Fowler freed in civil rights killing
By
on July 07, 2011 at 10:51 AM, updated July 07, 2011 at 3:51 PM
District Attorney Michael Jackson, the chief prosecutor in Perry County, said federal authorities are still investigating ex-trooper James Bonard Fowler in the fatal shooting of a motorist in suburban Birmingham in 1966.
Fowler, 77, pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of manslaughter last year in the death of Jimmie Lee Jackson, who was shot to death in Marion. Originally charged with murder in 2007, Fowler claimed he fired only after the man threatened him with a bottle.
Court records in the Jackson case show Fowler fatally shot Nathan Johnson in the Shelby County city of Alabaster on May 8, 1966. In that case, Fowler claimed he fired because Johnson tried to assault him with a billy club after being arrested during a traffic stop.
FBI spokesmen didn't immediately return calls seeking comment on the Johnson shooting, but the Perry County DA said agents had been in contact with him about the case, which was on a list of "cold cases" from the civil rights era that the FBI said it was reviewing.
"The Department of Justice is looking into that shooting," said Jackson.
Fowler's defense lawyer, George Beck, was sworn in this week as the chief federal prosecutor in Montgomery, and an attorney who assisted Beck did not immediately return a message seeking comment. The daughter of Jimmie Lee Jackson said she would like to see additional charges filed against Fowler.
"I feel like he should have had more time than just six months," said Cordelia Billingsley. "But I forgive him. I have to for my own life to be able to go on."
A judge in Perry County sentenced Fowler to six months in jail in November, and Geneva County officials agreed to let him serve the time there to be nearer his family.
Fowler was due to finish serving his sentence in mid-May, but Geneva Sheriff Greg Ward said the man had health problems that required surgery so Ward made the decision to free Fowler from custody on April 14. Fowler had an operation about two weeks later and his lawyers reported on his condition, but Ward said the former trooper wasn't required to report back to jail.
"I have to follow the recommendations of the doctors and nurses on this kind of thing," said Ward. "He was sick the whole time he was here."
Billingsley said she doesn't know whether federal authorities are still reviewing the death of her father, but she'd like to see additional investigation of his slaying.
"I still think more should be done," she said.
Witnesses said Jackson was trying to protect his mother and grandfather, who had been clubbed in a restaurant after a protest march turned chaotic on Feb. 18, 1965 in Marion. Fowler said he fired in self-defense.
Perry County prosecutors wanted to use evidence from the Shelby County shooting during Fowler's trial in the Jimmie Lee Jackson shooting, but those plans were cast aside after Fowler pleaded guilty.
Friday, March 6, 2015
China’s new terrorism law provokes anger in U.S., concern at home
BEIJING — A new draft counterterrorism law here is provoking unusually strong condemnation, from multinational companies trying to do business in China to domestic dissidents trying to stay out of jail and from global human rights groups to foreign health workers.
Governments around the world have dealt with the threat of terrorism by increasing surveillance and curtailing civil rights, but China’s government, critics say, has exploited a genuine terrorist threat to further empower its repressive state-security apparatus. It is, they say, invoking the dangers of violent extremism to justify and expand an already harsh crackdown on civil rights and to punish foreign information technology companies that refuse to play by its rules.
Human Rights Watch calls the draft law a “recipe for abuses.” President Obama focused his ire on provisions in the law that would affect U.S. technology companies doing business here and force them to hand over the keys to their operating systems to Chinese surveillance.
The new law is symptomatic of the gulf between China and the West over human rights, and it is widening a serious rift between Washington and Beijing over cyberspace.
In an interview with Reuters this week, Obama said he had raised his concerns with China’s President Xi Jinping.
“We have made it very clear to them that this is something they are going to have to change if they are to do business with the United States,” he said.
The state news agency Xinhua called Obama’s criticism “utterly groundless” on Wednesday, adding it was “another piece of evidence of the arrogance and hypocrisy of U.S. foreign policy.”
China blames escalating violence in its far-western province of Xinjiang on Islamist extremists bent on violent jihad; it says terrorists use the Internet to organize and to spread their ideas. It frames the new legislation as part of its efforts to counter that threat and to govern the country according to the “rule of law.” It is asking for international support and approval for its approach.
Julia Famularo, who has been studying the law for the Project 2049 Institute, an Arlington-based think tank devoted to Asian security issues, said every government has to strike a balance between fighting terrorism and citizens’ rights.
“We could argue whether the United States, Britain and other countries have been able to strike that balance — but what we are really concerned about in China is that these measures are incredibly broad, and we are worried they can be used to attack dissidents,” she said.
One of those dissidents, Hu Jia, under house arrest since last June, said the law might appeal to people angry at terrorist attacks, but it was fundamentally designed to extend a comprehensive system of control introduced by President Xi.
“Once you want to exercise your political rights as a citizen, you will touch the red line and be caught in the net,” he said in a telephone interview. “According to criminal procedure law, your right to a lawyer will be restricted if you are accused of endangering state security or terrorism. And because the government controls propaganda, if they say you are a terrorist, then you are.”
In Xinjiang, China stands accused of a wide-ranging crackdown on the religious, political and civil rights of the mainly Muslim Uighur people, of torture and enforced disappearances and widespread socio-economic discrimination.
Now, as the arrest and imprisonment of moderate Uighur academic Ilham Tohtidemonstrated last year, anyone attempting to criticize government policy or assert an independent Uighur identity runs the risk of a being branded a separatist and, by association, a terrorist.
Indeed, the law offers a broad definition of terrorism that includes not only “activity” but also “opinion” that “generates social panic, threatens public security or coerces a state organ or international organization.”
It conflates terrorism with what China defines as “religious extremism,” including, for example, the forcing of children to take part in religious activities.
Although the Chinese government has a right and responsibility to provide public order, says Sophie Richardson of Human Rights Watch, the law, and the security mind-set it lays bare, “is just as likely to fuel unrest and violence as it is to mitigate it.”
Richardson says an “incredibly broad spectrum of behavior” can be construed as criminal, “with no avenues to challenge it.”
“Even in perfectly ordinary, non-controversial criminal cases, the right to a fair trial in China is a rare thing already,” she said. “Add on that veneer of terrorism, and you have very little hope of a meaningful opportunity to defend yourself.”
The first draft of the law also demanded that IT companies operating in China hand over encryption codes, install security “backdoors” in their products to Chinese authorities, and keep servers within the country.
Obama said it would essentially force foreign companies “to turn over to the Chinese government mechanisms where they can snoop and keep track of all users of their services.”
In China, it is not only Xinhua that accuses Obama of hypocrisy. Beyond the lack of due process at Guantanamo Bay or the extended government powers granted under the Patriot Act, China points out, Western governments often request that tech companies hand over encryption codes.
Western free-speech advocates counter that China lacks effective constraints to state power, in the form of an independent judiciary, a feisty legislature, a business sector willing to stick up for itself or an independent media.
That, they say, makes government over-reach in China potentially much more dangerous.
At a news conference Wednesday, Fu Ying, spokeswoman for the National People’s Congress, China’s largely rubber-stamp parliament, said the law had been modified to reflect some of those concerns during a second round of drafting last month.
In particular, she said, there were “hot discussions among legislators” on how to “better balance the relation between counterterrorism measures and safeguarding human rights.”
She said the articles relating to IT companies had been “improved” to include “strict conditions and limits” on when data could be obtained. In particular, the law would only be used to prevent or investigate terrorist activity, she said, and after “a strict review and approval procedure.”
Richardson, of Human Rights Watch, says the only revision worth making to the first draft would be “to rip it up and start again.”
As a crackdown on nongovernmental organizations has intensified under Xi’s presidency, the new counterterrorism law also includes a section mandating the central bank and civil administration to supervise and inspect financial flows into foundations, social organizations and foreign NGOs.
“Everyone is very concerned,” said a manager at an international NGO, who requested anonymity for fear of inviting problems. “This puts us into a very different purview. We are no longer civil society, now we are potential terrorists.”
Gu Jing, Xu Yangjingjing, Liu Liu and Xu Jinglu contributed to this report.
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
Keyshia Cole - Singer calls husband a cheat on Instagram
Keyshia ColeSinger calls husband a cheat on Instagram
If there were any hopes of Keyshia Cole and husband, Booby Gibson coming back together, then that's all gone after the singer caught him cheating!
Keyshia Cole and husband "Booby" Gibson have lost hope of staying together after the singer indirectly called him a cheat on Instagram yesterday, March 1.
Reportedly Cole was visiting Booby at a video shoot when she discovered he was trying to talk to another woman via phone, begging for sex time.
The songstress then posted screen shots of Booby’s texts to the unknown female.
Keyshia went on to post another photo of her son with Boody captioning:
"@Daniel_Gibsonjr is all that matters. Everything is not for everybody. Gib is a Great father. I'm just ready to put this all behind me/Begin my healing process for once Nd for all."
It's now clear that the couple won't be getting back anytime soon.
Saturday, February 14, 2015
Friday, February 13, 2015
SHERIFF THWARTS IRS EFFORT TO SEIZE LAND
THE POWER TO DESTROY
SHERIFF THWARTS IRS EFFORT TO SEIZE LAND
Refuses to allow sale until due process exhausted
- image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/print.png
- Text smaller
- Text bigger
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/02/Sheriff-Scott-London.jpg
Sheriff Scott London
In a case reminiscent of the Cliven Bundy land standoff in Nevada, a New Mexico sheriff is refusing on constitutional grounds to allow the federal government to sell the property of a business owner embroiled in a dispute with the IRS until the owner receives due process of law and his appeal is heard.
The land owned by Kent Carter, who has battled the IRS for decades over taxes on the earnings of his small construction business, is scheduled for auction Feb. 19. But Eddy County Sheriff Scott London notified the Internal Revenue Service the sale has been canceled, according to a BenSwann.com report by Priscilla Jones.
One court document listed Carter’s debt at $145,000, but he contends the figure was “pulled out of thin air” by an assessing agent.
Carter said his bill increased a few hundred dollars every time he challenged the IRS, BenSwann.com reported. He contends the IRS violated its own tax code, used improper accounting methods and unlawfully gave no notice of deficiency.
The matter came to a head about 10 days before Christmas when U.S Marshals broke in the door of Carter’s rental property with their guns drawn. The only person inside was a young mother with a new baby who was by herself while her husband was working.
Jones reported Sheriff London was called to Carter’s property to intervene. The sheriff advised the Marshals that Carter’s case was in appeal and he deserved due process.
The Marshalls threatened to arrest London, Jones reported, but “he stood his ground and they backed off.”
“Many officers have stood up over the years for the rights of citizens being victimized by the federal government,” said Sheriff Richard Mack, founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, reported BenSwann.com. “But Sheriff London is the first one to stand up to the IRS since the early 1990s. His actions show courage and humility. London is setting a good example for the rest of our sheriffs.”
Carter claims his private and confidential information, including his Social Security number, was filed in public records and given to third parties. A judge, however, concurred with the IRS that the agency can publish and disperse the private information of Americans if it is trying to collect their money or property. Carter says, according to BenSwann.com, the IRS claims he owes $890,000, a figure that “doubled with the stroke of a pen.”
The original case concerning Carter’s business taxes was decided in favor of the IRS by U.S. District Judge Robert Brack. Carter then filed for appeal of Brack’s decision in both the U.S. District Court in Las Cruces, New Mexico, and in the U.S. Appellate Court in Denver.
‘Solid constitutional ground’
Attorney and constitutional expert KrisAnne Hall has been advising London on his constitutional response to the IRS.
“Sheriff London asked me if he was on solid legal ground to refuse to allow the IRS to auction Carter’s property,” she said in an interview with WND. “The legal dispute with the IRS is over unpaid business taxes, not income taxes. Mr. Carter is currently involved in an appeals, but the IRS is trying to seize his property before due process has run its course.”
Hall advised London that he was correct in his understanding that the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and section 18 of the New Mexico Constitution both guarantee a right to due process.
“I discussed with Sheriff London the supremacy of the sheriff over the federal government, based upon his oath of office.” she said. “This is a premise supported by the Founders and the Supreme Court in Mack, Prins v. U.S.”
She reaffirmed London was on solid ground, based on his oath to support and defend the constitutions of the U.S. and of New Mexico.
London received a call Feb. 6 from the chief law enforcement agent for the under secretary of the Department of Treasury, advising London with veiled threats he would be arrested if he continued interfering on behalf of Carter.
The agent insisted Carter’s case was over, the appeals court had denied the appeal and that London had no ground to deny the sale.
London confirmed that the appeal is pending and informed the agent he would not allow the sale to take place as long as Clark had not exhausted his right to due process.
“Judge Brack is refusing to recognize that Mr. Carter has filed these appeals,” Hall wrote on her website, “and is aiding the IRS in denying Mr. Carter his right to due process.
Hall said Brack and the IRS “are relying on a technicality to steal Mr. Carter’s land.”
“Mr. Carter filed his appeal in a timely manner. However, as a pro-se litigant he was not aware that he had to file a document to ‘stay’ Judge’s order to prevent the taking of his land prior to the conclusion of his appeal.”
A pro se litigant is someone who is representing himself, without professional legal counsel.
“Legally speaking, this ‘Motion to Stay the Judgment’ is a formality and is practically guaranteed to be granted pending an appeal,” said Hall.
“Judge Brack knows Mr. Carter is a pro-se litigant, knows that Mr. Carter has filed an appeal and also knows that a ‘Motion to Stay the Judgment’ pending the appeal would be granted, Hall said. “But Judge Brack and the IRS do not care and are going to steal Mr. Carter’s land in spite of the fact that Mr. Carter is still engaged in his right to due process.”
Hall said the government agents “are using a ‘form over function’ approach to legalize theft.”
“Sheriff London has decided to honor his oath and force the IRS to follow the Constitution,” she said.
BenSwann.com reported the Taxation & Revenue Department ordered Carter to cease “engaging in business in New Mexico” until his arbitrary tax debt was paid.
Carter appealed the injunction, arguing it is both unconstitutional and vague. He contended it deprived him of his right to make a living and barred him from “carrying on or causing to be carried on any activity with the purpose of direct or indirect benefit.”
“The IRS fabricates evidence against citizens by pulling numbers out of a hat and adding fees,” wrote Sheriff Mack. “They wear people down emotionally and financially until they can’t take it anymore. No citizen should ever have to fight the IRS for decades in order to keep his land.”
Carter declared: “The IRS is a lie. The income tax is a lie. Why should they be able to take anything? They’re worse than the mafia.”
Carter voluntarily vacated his property and relocated his mobile home to an undisclosed location.
“I chose to leave to keep it from escalating to something ugly — like Ruby Ridge, Idaho,” he said.
Carter said he advised the Marshals and IRS agents who publicly claimed he had armed friends on his land, “If there is going to be any violence, it is going to be you who starts it.”
Hall wrote: “Short of physical resistance, due process and community oversight (a jury of your peers) was intended to be some of the greatest protections against government threat against property. So important was to be the protection of due process, that it is placed multiple times in our Bill of Rights.”
In a letter to IRS agent Darlene Jones Feb. 5, London reiterated that Carter had not exhausted or waived his due process.
“Thus I am notifying you that under compulsion to my oath to the Constitution of the United States of America and the Constitution of the State of New Mexico, I shall not allow the sales of these three properties on 19 February 2015,” he wrote.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/new-mexico-sheriff-stands-against-irs/#R38rLYPPkvzJhy2p.99
Thursday, February 12, 2015
The Return of Kodak in a cell phone
Kodak’s IM5 Android Smartphone Available for Pre-Order from Clove UK for £189.98
CES 2015 wasn’t exactly a hotbed of activity from mobile brands this year, with nothing new from Sony or Samsung, but it was host to a number of surprises. One of those surprises was the rebirth of the Kodak brand in a new Android smartphone, the IM5. As you’d imagine, the device is geared for another market area in the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
