UK Hacking Home Computers Sans Warrants Likely to Increase

Shana Kluck — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:15:06 -0600

Though news of this sort cannot be considered unusual any longer, I still find it insufferable and mildly shocking. The likelihood of a British citizen having their personal home computer hacked by government authorities, secretly and without a warrant, has increased. Even more infuriating, this intrusion may be at the behest of a foreign nation, thanks to a recent plan adopted by the EU.

Since the hacking may proceed if an officer believes there is sufficient reason to believe it would help prevent or detect a serious crime, the obvious question is, who decides what is considered “sufficient reason” and what is to prevent abuse of these over-reaching powers? If there is truly sufficient evidence, why wouldn’t a judge simply grant a warrant? This would at least grant some oversight.

In our own country, powers of this sort already exist, though I hope things haven’t gone so far that evidence gained in this way is being turned over to foreign authorities as well- though I don’t suppose I’d put much past the current administration.

Though these violations of privacy rights are appalling, far more alarming is the blasé acceptance by EU, UK and US citizens alike. Even worse are those who view it as good and necessary.

Last October, I attended a local university’s student Presidential debate, in which the college Democrat, Republican and Libertarian groups represented the candidate of their party. Both the Democrat and Republican students bore good testimony of their belief in the Constitution and the need to uphold it, and yet each found reason to ignore certain parts of it in order to achieve ends they believed vital. After the debate, I spoke at length with the Democrat representative, who was very angry with the Republicans’ belief that the civil liberties delineated in the Bill of Rights could be ignored for reasons of homeland security. But he had no qualms of going beyond the scope of the Constitution in regards to foreign aid or the federal welfare system. When I asked why he had the right to ignore the Constitution in order to achieve his goals, and yet the Republicans did not, he had to admit he had a double standard. But he still believed that his mission was honorable enough to make the exception.

This is the problem when we ignore the rule of law and each does what is “right in their own eyes”, especially when it is the lawmakers and law-enforcers that are most culpable. There is no accountability, no one to say “enough”.

I issue the same challenge to those who would runover or ignore our Constitution for their own “good intentioned” objectives that I gave to the Democrat student I spoke to at that debate. If your goals are so honorable and necessary that they must be accomplished, then work to change the Constitution, not disregard it.

Zimbabwe "Collapses"

Shana Kluck — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 11:56:34 -0600

The United States Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs stated Thursday that the country of Zimbabwe has “collapsed” and is on the verge of descending into Somalia-like social chaos. Zimbabwe, more-so than pretty much any other nation, is the antithesis of traditional American values of the rule of law, stable money, private property, free-markets, and individual free-will. Since assuming power decades ago, the dictatorial leader Robert Mugabe has taken a once relatively prosperous and stable south African nation and destroyed pretty much everything a government can possibly destroy. He has confiscated private property on a widescale basis, he jails anyone who opposes him politically, his government has printed money so incredibly fast that a loaf of bread cost over Z$10 billion, and now the masses of his nation are on the verge of mass starvation.

The unfortunate thing is that everything we see happening in America today is pretty much taken from the Zimbabwe playbook, only difference is the extent to which it is happening. Fortunately I have much greater faith in the people of America than the people of Zimbabwe to do whatever is necessary to stop a rogue leader from committing this level of violence against the rights of man.

Teacher Takes Unusual Approach to Augment Supply Budget

Shana Kluck — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:50:14 -0600

Anyone participating in the public school system as a student, parent or teacher is aware that slashes in the budget have affected supplies and resources for the classroom. I’ve heard local parents complaining that the yearly “school supplies” list contains things like toilet paper, which used to be provided by the school system. And many teachers are having to reach into their own wallets to make up the difference.

But one San Diego calculus teacher took a more creative approach to filling in the gap-

USAToday- When Tom Farber’s district announced they were cutting spending on supplies by nearly a third, Farber had a problem. At 3 cents a page, his tests would cost more than $500 a year. His copying budget: $316.

“Tough times call for tough actions,” he says. So he started selling ads on his test papers: $10 for a quiz, $20 for a chapter test, $30 for a semester final.

San Diego magazine and The San Diego Union-Tribune featured his plan just before Thanksgiving, and Farber came home from a few days out of town to 75 e-mail requests for ads. So far, he has collected $350. His semester final is sold out.

Of course, not everyone is happy with this solution, fearing commercialization within public schools, but I applaud this teacher for going above and beyond, as well as fostering a sense of community between the students, their parents (who financed a majority of the ads) and local businesses.

Guns, Drugs & Presidential Pardons

Shana Kluck — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:23:19 -0600

Though not at the rate of former presidents such as Reagan or Clinton, the expected rush of Bush Presidential pardons have begun, sure to raise the ire of some and the thanks of others. While all the pardonees have a “non-violent” offense in common, the wsj.com has noted another attribute that some of them share- a love of guns.

Coincidentally or not, at least seven of the 14 pardoned on Monday are former hunters or shooting enthusiasts. In interviews, five of them said they wrote in their petitions to the government that a desire to win back the right to bear arms was a chief reason for wanting a pardon.

Grammy award-winning hip-hop artist John Edward Forte also made the list after serving 7 years of his 14 year sentence for drug trafficking. Forte has maintained his innocence, claiming that he never received a fair trial.

Two conspicious names not on the list are Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. I’m sure the families of Ramos and Compean will question Bush’s decision to commute the sentence of a drug trafficker (as well as pardon several others convicted of minor drug use or possession), while leaving the two Border Security Guards in prison for shooting a Mexican drug smuggler. However, it should be noted that if this senseless, expensive debacle called the War on Drugs didn’t exist, none of them would be in prison in the first place.

Thanksgiving- A Case for Capitalism

Shana Kluck — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 09:42:38 -0600

We all grew up hearing the story of the first Thanksgiving- the deprivation and starvation, the help of the native Americans and the bountiful harvest that marked the first Thanksgiving.

What we rarely hear about is the method of economy the Puritans employed upon reaching the new shore- socialism. They endeavored to share the work and the fruits of their labor, eschewing the principles of private property and the free-market.

And how well did this work? Their Governor Bradford in his own words-

The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labor and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense. The strong… had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors everything else, thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them.

And for men’s wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it. Upon the point all being to have alike, and all to do alike, they thought themselves in the like condition, and one as good as another; and so, if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them… Let none object this is men’s corruption, and nothing to the course itself. I answer, seeing all men have this corruption in them, God in His wisdom saw another course fitter for them.

Thankfully, the Pilgrims saw the error of their ways before they all starved to death. They divided up the land between the families, allowing each to consume what they produced and trade what they could not. The results?

They had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression…By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the faces of things were changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God.

As America moves closer and closer to a socialized society, we would do well to learn from the past, lest we repeat their mistakes.

For further reading…

The $23 Million Ceiling

Shana Kluck — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:10:28 -0600

UN Secretary Ban Ki-moon was on hand at the UN European headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland to reveal the newest $23 million addition to the Human Right’s Council Chamber-

And what exactly inspired this year long project?

“On a day of immense heat in the middle of the Sahel desert, I recall with vivacity the mirage of an image of the world dripping toward the sky,” Barcelo, the artist, says. “Trees, dunes, donkeys, multicolored beings flowing drop by drop.”

Such a pricetag obviously comes with it’s share of controversy. MSNBC reports-

The Spanish Foreign Ministry says the government is funding 40 percent of the costs, with the rest footed by private-sector donors. Of the public money, 500,000 euros ($633,000) comes from a budget for overseas development aid and international organizations like the United Nations.

Spain’s conservative opposition Popular Party complained that this means money was diverted from projects to alleviate poverty and boost health care in poorer countries, but the ministry insists the funding for Barcelo’s work was separate.

The dispute reached Parliament last week, with Popular Party lawmaker Gonzalo Robles asking “how many thousands of children could have been looked after” with the money spent on the artwork. The ruling Socialists accused him of twisting the facts.

While completely unsurprising, this level of extravagence should be condemned by both the left and right. While I believe most United Liberty readers hold suspect the efforts of both international organizations and government promoting social welfare, I think we would all agree that if the money is going to be spent, it should be spent frugally and directed specifically to those who are most in need. Bureaucrats, whether they be in Brussels, DC, NYC, or Geneva, by no means qualify as “those most in need”.

GOP on the Right Path

Shana Kluck — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:00:47 -0600

Did the Republican Party learn anything from their resounding defeat on November 4th? Perhaps so. According to TheCurrentAffairs.com, the GOP is not only reaching out to their members for ideas on how to improve the party and it’s message, but they are doing it via the internet.

“We are a party of principles and must regain our voice,” Republican National Committee chairman Robert Duncan said in a statement announcing the creation of the website, RepublicanForAReason.

The “party of principle” part might be negotiable in light of the past eight disasterous years resulting from the Bush administration, but the need to regain their voice is certainly true. And soliciting ideas over the web is more likely to attract the interest of younger voters- a must if the GOP wants to survive beyond the current baby-boomer generation that creates the base of the party.

Of course, the real question is, “Will they listen?”. Throughout the primary season, internet phenomenon, Dr. Ron Paul, consistently cried out for the Republican Party to return to it’s small government, balanced budget, non-agression, pro-Constitution roots. He was roundly ignored by the GOP powers-that-be.

If Republicans truly want to see a change for the better in their party, don’t bother with the not-so-impressive new site. Go join your local Republican Party executive committee and start making a difference at the county and state levels.

Become the base. Become the leaders. Become the party.

Cupcakes: The New Cocaine

Shana Kluck — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:36:50 -0600

In efforts to stem the growing trend of childhood obesity, California lawmakers passed legislation in 2005 that restricted the sugar and fat content levels in food sold on public school campuses. The law went into effect in 2007, but outcry from parents and students against the regulations is bringing the nutritional restrictions to the notice of the national public. While the focus is currently on California, over 600 school districts across the country have similar strictures, with Kentucky campuses being subject to the strictest regulations.

But the laws effect more than just the meals and snacks sold by the schools to the students. It has also affected the age-old American tradition of bake-sale fundraisers. Cupcakes and cookies are now contraband on some campuses, leaving parents, students and organizations frustrated by this nanny-state intervention.

But aren’t these rules designed for our benefit? Since parents and students have failed to regulate their behavior, leading to ever-increasing weight gain, isn’t it the state’s responsibility to control our actions via legislation?

In a word? No.

And it frightens me that so many fail to see the harm in these kinds of laws. I won’t argue against the right state governments might have to control the public schools in their jurisdiction. What I do question is the type of mentality that would lead to the election of politicians who would dare to pass this kind of legislation. What concerns me is the willing abdication of parental rights on the part of the voters. How much more will be given up? Will we next be told what children can be fed in the privacy of our homes? After all, that’s where most of the meals are eaten and lifelong habits are formed.

History shows that this kind of prohibition simply doesn’t work. Despite federal pressure and state laws, underage children, in general, have ready access to tobacco and alcohol. Billions of dollars and legions of federal officers have done little to affect the traffic of illegal drugs and many argue that prohibition does more to increase the potential harms of illicit drug use, rather than decrease it. Laws restricting the intake of sugar and fat on a school campus seem a bit ludicrous in comparison, and even less likely to have any lasting positive effects.

Forbidden fruit is often the most desirable. Teaching children to make healthy eating choices is an admirable goal, but encouraging moderation in their habits, instead of forced abstenation, is more likely to lead to a balanced diet and a successful life in general.

But whether or not the government and schools should even have a role in this issue is still the question that parents should be asking themselves. Ought teachers and administrators to set good examples in their own public choices? Yes. Should they be able to force their choices upon their students? No. Their job is to teach skills relating to education. Raising children and deciding what they should or should not consume is the job of the parents. Abdicating these rights emboldens further interference by the government- a trend that needs to be reversed, not encouraged.

Reclaim Your Republic

Shana Kluck — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:37:10 -0600

No other election day has held the level of significance for me than this one does. While I’ve always voted, this was the first election cycle in which I took an avid interest and actually became involved in the political scene. For nine months, I was an active supporter of my hero, Dr. Ron Paul. After Super Tuesday, and it became evident that Dr. Paul would not secure the Republican nomination, I turned my energies towards the Libertarian Party and it’s nominee, Bob Barr. Though no longer actively supporting Barr, I’ve stayed involved politically as assistant editor of United Liberty and Alabama’s Campaign for Liberty state coordinator. You might say that I’ve been bitten by the political bug.

This day is also significant because I also believe that it happens to be one of the most critical times in American history. Dr. Paul was fond of saying during the primary season that the Republican party has lost it’s way and strayed from it’s roots. I think that applies to all Americans, no matter the political persuasion. We were once a country founded on freedom- religious, political, and financial. We were a nation of rugged-individualism, with a pioneering spirit. We believed in lending a helping hand, but knew the dangers of being dependent on any person or any institution. We admired our leaders, but saw them as flawed humans that were to be restrained by the Constitution.

Today, our civil liberties are being eroded at an alarming rate. Our treasury coffers are not just empty, but in the negative. We’re headed towards bankruptcy, but there’s no talk from DC about the need to balance budgets, stop deficit spending and shrink the empire we’ve created- to the detriment of our global reputation. The very politicians that have led us into this wilderness are now claiming to know the way back. And because Americans have become dependent up on the advice of “experts” and largely negligent of independent thought, they are being duped into trusting in the same failed politicians and the philosophies they employ- nationalism, fascism, imperialism and socialism.

Fortunately, this also seems to be the year that the spirit of independence was again renewed and many eyes were opened. Whatever Dr. Paul’s goals may have been when he threw his hat into the ring, he inspired an awakening that will hopefully continue and be the driving force that steers our country back to the path of the Constitution and rule of law. Dr. Paul’s campaign drew together a coalition of freedom fighters and many liberty-oriented groups were borne of it- including United Liberty.

Admittedly, in this election, it’s questionable how much of an impact we’ll have. As ill-prepared, under-financed political novices, getting a Constitutionally-minded candidate on the ballot was not a successful endeavor in most cases. As we learn and become more politically savvy, I hope that exceptions like BJ Lawson and Tom McClintock may prove to be the rule in the coming years.

Today though, many of us will make our voices heard by voting for a third party candidate. Breaking the corrupt two-party stranglehold is imperative if we want to reclaim our country. However, not enough voters will take that step this time, for they are afraid. I find it sad that a spirit of fear pervades and rules the country, instigated by the radical presidential candidates representing the two major parties. This fear leads voters to vote for a candidate they neither like, nor agree with. But because they believe that he is still the lesser of two evils, they allow their fear to validate and perpetuate a broken system.

My hope is that Americans no longer allow fear to dictate their actions. It’s been said that courage is not a lack of fear, but deciding to do what’s right, despite the fear. Our lack of courage is the impetus of the draining of our civil liberties and destruction of our economy. We can’t blame the politicians. We put them there in the first place. Despite recently voting to pass the wildly unpopular TARP bailout bill, most of the representatives that voted for it (against the ardent and well-vocalized desires of their constituents) will be voted back into office today. What does that say about us as voters?

Folks, despite their claims, politicians really don’t know what’s best for us. They’re supposed to represent us, not think for us. If they vote against the will of the people who elected them, they are not doing their job and need to be fired. It’s time to clean house. You can start today by voting against any politician who is not truly representing you. You can continue by finding a candidate to run in the next election cycle who does. Whatever you do, don’t forget. Don’t become complacent. This country belongs to the people- not special interests, not corporations, not the “elite” in the Beltway.

Reclaim your Republic, America.

McCain is No Republican, Let Alone Conservative

Shana Kluck — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 09:49:07 -0600

I’ve been trying to convince a few of my family members that John McCain is not really a Republican, nor a conservative. Fortunately, he’s just proved it for me-

Recent posts by Shana Kluck