Sen. Lindsey Graham appeared to confirm this week one of the greatest fears for civil libertarians in the aftermath of the burning of the Qu’ran (Koran) by Rev. Terry Jones. With Muslims murdering innocent people as a protest to the book burning, Senator Graham has called for Congress to go hold people accountable for such acts. The message is clear and predictable: if someone’s exercise of free speech has caused problems, limit the free speech.
In the video above, Graham states “I wish we could find a way to hold people accountable.” He stresses “[f]ree speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war.” Of course, neither he nor his colleagues ever bothered to declare war. Likewise, Obama did not even consult with Congress before going to war in Libya.
Fortunately, the Constitution still exists to bar such impulses against free speech. Notably, however, China is arresting people who are viewed as destabilizing the country with their art and ideas. Now some members of Congress want to join countries in a type of criminal blasphemy law — an idea that Obama appeared to accept in supporting a resolution under pressure from Arab allies on protecting religion from critics.
Free speech is designed to protect us against our own leaders — like Sen. Graham. It is not enjoyed at the whim of the U.S. Senate. And, by the way, the diaper genie is a “great idea.” Free speech is what defines us as a people.
Jonathan Turley
kay,
Again, I don’t care about your monomaniacal ramblings.
Seek help.
Quit wasting our time.
The Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense are bound by the same rules that I just posted.
I am really interested in using the power of technology to secure due process.
The Privacy Act allows claims when USMS knowingly and intentionally arrests and damages a person using the Joint Automated Booking System who is not criminally charged and the officers know that there is no criminal information. DOJ is required to
(9) establish rules of conduct for persons involved in the design, development, operation, or maintenance of any system of records, or in maintaining any record, and instruct each such person with respect to such rules and the requirements of this section, including any other rules and procedures adopted pursuant to this section and the penalties for noncompliance;
(10) establish appropriate administrative, technical and physical safeguards to insure the security and confidentiality of records and to protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to their security or integrity which could result in substantial harm, embarrassment, inconvenience, or unfairness to any individual on whom information is maintained;
(11) at least 30 days prior to publication of information under paragraph (4)(D) of this subsection, publish in the Federal Register notice of any new use or intended use of the information in the system, and provide an opportunity for interested persons to submit written data, views, or arguments to the agency;
“My legal situation is not ‘my personal problem’ only.”
Yeah, kay. See? That’s where you are flat wrong.
Believe it or not, it is your personal problem. None of us are impacted by it nor can we do anything to assist you substantively to get that hearing you so desire. Your case is not some staggeringly important 1st Amendment issue. And believe it or not, a large part of the negative outcome you suffered is caused by you representing yourself. Your arrogance and incompetence to litigate are as much to blame for your situation as the original cause of action is.
I’m also adding paranoia to what I think is wrong with you too if you think your actions here somehow protect you from additional witness retaliation. If these people really wanted you dead? Car accidents are quite staggeringly easy to arrange. 115 people a day die in car accidents. These people don’t want you dead or you’d be dead, kay. These people are sitting back and laughing at you if they are thinking about you at all.
Get help.
Quit wasting our time.
Kay,
Psssst….they do it all the time…pssst…don’t tell the ones in Guantanamo…
sorry for my typos
religion professionals social network
BIL
My legal situation is not “my personal problem” only. The fact that the government broke the law and violated the First Amendment is a matter of public interest to some people if not to you.
I have gained a lot by discussing my legal situation on blogs. It was a form of “service by publication” as a substitute for a court hearing, which I was denied. I think it has protected me from additional witness retaliation.
If you are only interested in religious retaliation, why don’t you respond to my suggestion of religious proessionals service network.
You really helped me with the complaint I am trying to draft right now. You led me to the Diane Woods quotation that 18 USC section 401 is limited to criminal contempt.
And, I just followed the link you posted and found this at LectLaw Imposition of Federal Litigation Sanctions:
Unless the sanction is minor and the misconduct obvious, the court should memorialize its findings and reasons on the record or by written order. – fn.51 The findings should identify the objectionable conduct clearly, state the factual and legal reasons for the court’s action, including the need for the particular sanction imposed and the inadequacy of less severe measures, and the authority relied on. Making such a record will facilitate appellate review and help the appellate court understand the basis for the court’s exercise of its discretion. –
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(2)(B) & advisory committee’s note. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(C)(3).
In my case against Kevin Bennett et al. D of Colorado 02-cv-1950 there is no such record.
Except you’re not going to get an airing of the disputed facts by your endless thread-jacking here, kay.
You’re just annoying people who, while they wish you no ill will, really wish you’d shut up about your personal problem or save it for YOUR blog.
Most people come here – although the specifics vary – for the wide breadth of discussion of issues mostly related to our legal system and Constitution although sometimes not. Not to hear about your personal issues ad nauseum.
The bottom line is if you’re trying to get a hearing to (re)state your case? No one with the power to grant such a hearing gives a flying rats ass about what you do here. No prosecutor is going to wake up tomorrow, read this thread, and rush to the office to start a case against the people who wronged you. No Senator is going to read it and launch an investigation out of righteous outrage. No one with the power to do something is going to do anything because of what you say here.
You are, in short, wasting not only your time, but ours as well. While I don’t care if you waste your own time? I do mind when you waste my time and the time of others not interested nor empowered to do anything about your personal problem.
You asked what I though was wrong with you and one of the issues I responded with was obsession (possibly OCD). I responded that way because your attendant compulsion seems to be blogging about your personal problem here. More accurately, the form of obsession you suffer from is probably a form of monomania. Wiki describes monomania as “a single pathological preoccupation in an otherwise sound mind. Emotional monomania is that in which the patient is obsessed with only one emotion or several related to it; intellectual monomania is that which is related to only one kind of delirious idea or ideas.” While monomania is not a proper DSM diagnosis these days, the condition still exists but it is called different names by psychological professionals depending upon the specifics of manifestation.
Get help with your obsession, kay. Cause of action or not? It’s pretty obvious you are not well. Untreated mental illness usually only gets worse when left untreated.
I’m not being snarky. I’m not being mean. When you talk about suicide and show obvious signs of obsession, I tell you to seek help for your own good and the good of those who do care about you.
BIL
For reasons I don’t know you are some how opposed to my getting an airing of disputed facts or a decision on the merits in a court of law.
My interactions with Bennett et al are not voluntary on my part. Even if I were totally psycho my seeing a psychologist would not stop Bennett et al from hurting me.
“‘Stop being their toy’ is easier said than done.”
That’s why people get help with their obsessions, kay.
Or don’t.
Dear Wootsy
“Stop being their toy” is easier said than done.
I really don’t think that was the real Kevin Bennett, or the same Kevin Bennett, there are actually a number of people with the same name.
I once read a science fiction novel that said that when intellectuals are under stress, they intellectualize. That really is true. Maybe it would be easier if my first response was to jog. I’d be skinnier at least.
When I was growing up, my father was in the Dale Carnegie program and he used to come home and talk about positive thinking all the time. Which really is less stressful in the long term.
Kevin Bennett 1, April 6, 2011 at 4:43 pm
Kay,
We have found you. Are you still living in the same old hangout?
———————————-
see Kay, there are assholes everywhere…truth is, they aren’t as smart as you and they know it. They NEED to make you look bad because they are pervs and they get off on that sort of thing…and because people probably don’t like them in general and you are probably well liked and intelligent. Stop being their toy.
What might help with the religious retaliation issues is an on-line social network for religious professionals of different religions.
They could get to know each other without spending any money and then they might be able to get together at conferences on housing, food, education, clean water etc. or for something relaxing like fishing or golf. They could have links to music and on-line language translation assistance. Then ministers of different religions could “friend” each other and that could help to defuse potentially violent situations and promote productive solutions and mutual respect.
I just remembered that what OARC said about my Daniel Moore complaint was that permission to appear in related matters after being a government employee could be valid without a written record. That rule apparently is now being interpreted to mean that permission requires a written record.
The Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct are on-line. All the states have similar wording or did when I looked but even a word like “written” permission can make a big difference. You have to really study it. One of the ways they make it confusing is they mix things lawyers must or must not do with things that are nice to do.
I think that there are presumptions in evidence and that one of them is that legal events involving permissions are written, that it doesn’t have to be explicit in the regulation every time.
I know that a lot of my bad legal experience had to do with changes in presumptions.
Gyges-
Today if you have an organization of two people, you have a website and sell T-shirts. You will soon have more members though- one from the FBI, one from the CIA, one from the NSA, one from the FBI to watch the CIA guy, one from the CIA to watch the NSA guy, etc.,etc.,etc. Soon you will have enough to form a “Movement”.
Kay,
We have found you. Are you still living in the same old hangout?
Gyges,
Campus cops.
When you’re just too good a cop to be a mall cop.
Sometime offline, remind me to tell you my mall cop story from high school. It is the very portrait of a man with a little power gone completely mad. And me and a real cop having a really good laugh at his expense.
Henman,
No, each party only had one member (my friend and I), that’s the only way you can claim to be a member of a “counter culture” if it’s got more than one member, it’s simply a culture.
Never underestimate the amount of BS two bored musicians can spew.
Wootsy
They made me look really bad 5 to 10 years ago. David Brougham gave an interview to the Denver Post and said it was impossible to understand anything I wrote. etc. etc.
I figured the only way it would get worse is if they murdered me. And that blogging was a way to protect against that.
Gyges-
I would have joined both parties, but I probably would have slept through the meetings unless they were held at a nearby tavern. Contrary to all medical research, beer was the only thing that kept me awake during my college years.