In case you weren’t watching our public schools are completely gone.

Go ahead and watch the first part, until the reporter and cameraman cross the street, then skip to about 7:40 and you’ll see what happens when they go back across.

This is what happens in America? The police make up the law as they go?

Cops like these need to be dealt such swift justice as to set an example for other law enforcement that we, the American People will not accept their tyranny. If our courts will not provide such justice then we must take it into our own hands as people and deliver that justice ourselves.

In this video you will see a police officer on a bike attack peaceful protesters. At the end if is pointed out that one of the “protesters” is actually an undercover police officer.

Secret police infiltrating protest groups is not okay. This is tyranny.

On one hand they do say the cops are out of line, but then they start joking about it, and that’s just not funny.

You’re only as free as the most oppressed or your countrymen. Based on these events we’re not so free.

Too bad I wasn’t there, I would have had this guy’s back.

The only thing worse than these fucking pigs are the spineless people who sat by to watch this happen.

What’s really disgusting is all these fucking pussies who stand by and watch a man have his rights violated. There are way more people then cops, yet when they tell people to get back in preparation for their assault everyone is quick to follow orders.

Fuck Orders!!

When someone gets their rights violated it’s no different then you having your rights violated.

Want to know when Congress is really fucking you?? When they say they’re doing it to ‘protect children’ from the dangers of this scary world we live in. Yeah, the same people who protected Mark Foley when they knew what he was up to.

Here are a few excerpts from Press Esc

US senators today made a bipartisan call for the universal implementation of filtering and monitoring technologies on the Internet in order to protect children at the end of a Senate hearing for which civil liberties groups were not invited.

And, from Ted “series of tubes” Stevens:

“While filtering and monitoring technologies help parents to screen out offensive content and to monitor their child’s online activities, the use of these technologies is far from universal and may not be fool-proof in keeping kids away from adult material,” Sen. Inouye said. “In that context, we must evaluate our current efforts to combat child pornography and consider what further measures may be needed to stop the spread of such illegal material over high-speed broadband connections.”

“Given the increasingly important role of the Internet in education and commerce, it differs from other media like TV and cable because parents cannot prevent their children from using the Internet altogether,” Sen. Stevens said. “The headlines continue to tell us of children who are victimized online. While the issues are difficult, I believe Congress has an important role to play to ensure that the protections available in other parts of our society find their way to the Internet.”

The Center for Democracy and Technology released a statement on this issue:

Constitutional Issues Critical in Online Child “Protection” - As the Senate Commerce Committee debates how best to protect children on the Internet, lawmakers must take special care to avoid overly simple solutions that would do more harm than good. In its zeal to protect kids from predators and potentially inappropriate content, Congress must not trample the First Amendment rights of Internet users, CDT said in a statement submitted to the Committee today. The Committee is holding a hearing entitled “Protecting Children on the Internet,” that features no representatives from the civil liberties community. July 24, 2007

This is how they will get their foot in the door, with regards to censoring the web. If we allow this to happen, we can kiss our First Amendment goodbye, as protecting children will quickly become censoring any content they deem undesirable, whether it be political speech, religious messages, or news they don’t want reported.

Call your Representative and Senators in Congress, and tell them we will not accept any form of censorship of the internet by the Government.

Okay guys, if this isn’t a sign that things might not be “all right” I don’t know what will be.

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled against an Alaskan high school student who unfurled a banner that said “bong hits for jesus” on it, while on his own personal time.

They also overturned a ban on corporate sponsored political ads, saying:

The ruling in the election case is likely to be seen and felt by voters starting early next year. It could mean a return to the 1990s when TV viewers were often urged to “send a message” to an unspecified candidate about his or her stand on a certain issue.

These ads were often paid for with corporate or union money, and they were banned by the McCain-Feingold Act five years ago. The Supreme Court upheld the ban in a 5-4 decision before the 2004 election.

But the high court essentially changed course today and said these issue-oriented ads are legal if they name a candidate running for office, so long as they stop short of urging the public to vote for or against the candidate.

The chief justice said these ads involve “core political speech”, which is protected by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

“We give the benefit of the doubt to speech, not censorship,” Roberts said. He was joined by Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Anthony M. Kennedy. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas agreed, although they would have gone further and struck down entirely the broadcast ban set in the McCain-Feingold Act.

The benefit of the doubt huh? I think what “his honor” meant was we give the benefit of the doubt to corporations, not ordinary people.