March 27, 2009 at 2:20 P.M. Calls received: On March 26 at 4:54 P.M. from 062-265-4527; caller +50622654527 (NJ Law?); then on March 27 at 2:17 P.M. from 062-259-1195; caller +50622654527 (NJ Superior Court?). F.B.I. getting close, boys? Direct? Indirect? Marketers? OAE?
No images can be posted at blogger or with my profile. MSN groups is still "closed" and my writings at "Critique" may not exist at this point. My second book is still suppressed and will not be sent to on-line booksellers. The ISBN number I purchased may be invalid. Numerous scans reveal daily viruses, spyware, and other intrusions as well as attacks against my computer, together with defacements of my essays and other writings -- all of this is made possible by New Jersey's political and legal corruption. The true number of visitors to these blogs is about three times what is shown on my profile. Negative votes against my reviews at Amazon all came from one computer. How curious? The device allowing for counting the number of visitors to this site was broken or disabled by hackers.
March 27, 2009 at 9:11 A.M. I am still unable to access my home e-mail. I will continue to write for as long as possible with this computer. I will search for another place to write. Several essays were defaced, once again, including the Bernard Williams essay. I will do my best to correct writings which have been vandalized. The frustrations and obstructions, stress-inducement, harassment, denials of creative opportunities, suppression and censorship of written work are intended to induce depression or collapse. I find all of this energizing. I will continue to write.
March 26, 2009 at 9:02 P.M. Several essays have been vandalized or defaced during the hours when my computer was hacked into this afternoon. Access to the Internet or my e-mails has been obstructed. I cannot say how many essays have been altered or destroyed. I cannot repair harm done to my writings at "Critique," at MSN, if that site still exists. I will do my best to correct the affected essays at blogger.
March 26, 2009 at 4:39 P.M. My home e-mail is interfered with. I cannot access my e-mails at all. This will make it easier to interfere with all of my writings at my home computer, preventing me from running effective security scans.
I will continue to struggle against these attacks aimed at my writings -- attacks emanating from New Jersey government offices and officials. Have you no sense of shame about betraying your oaths by engaging in cybercrime and these extortion tactics, Mr. Rabner and Ms. Milgram? No italics or bold script are available after the latest wave of attacks against this blog. ("What is it like to be tortured?" and "What is it like to be plagiarized?" and "How Censorship Works in America.") You owe me some money. How much was stolen from my office, Stuart?
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called on China and other countries to be respectful of human rights and freedom of speech as the worst of these censorship efforts are directed against me, and others (probably), before the eyes of the world. Does anyone detect a contradiction between our public pronouncements and increasing lack of tolerance of dissent as well as censorship and suppressions of political speech? I do. I am sure that Secretary Clinton is concerned about this contradiction. As of my first posting of this essay italics could not be used and bold script was unavailable.
"Justice Not for Sale," (Editorial) The New York Times, March 13, 2009, p. A26.
Neil A. Lewis, "Memos Reveal Scope of Power Sought in Fighting Terror," The New York Times, March 13, 2009, p. A1.
New obstructions to my writing efforts make it difficult to know whether this essay will actually make it on to the Internet. I will do my best to write and post essays. I will struggle to find sites where I can continue to write freely. Images cannot be used. I am searching for locations to post writings that may benefit from attached images.
These events taking place publicly -- which (I hope) are seen internationally -- are symbolic, sadly, of the harm suffered by America that the Obama administration is trying to repair. If a person protesting against the obscene corruption and theft of public funds in N.J. government is subjected to censorship, threats, or other harassment -- without penalty to the corrupt public officials responsible for the harassment -- then we no longer live under the rule of law.
Governor Corzine, Mr. Rabner, Ms. Milgram -- either the mafia runs N.J. or public officials govern the state. This assumes that there is a difference between mafia soldiers and public officials in New Jersey. At the moment, it appears that the mafia controls the state of N.J. Save your threats. If you plan to "frame me for something" or to "assassinate" me, I suggest that you do so immediately.
I will not stop confronting you in the aromatic neighborhoods of New Jersey with what you have become. You are expected to behave as power-wielders respectful of the Constitution. Why don't you try to do something about this continuing criminality and public censorship, Ms. Milgram? Too scared? The whole world is watching.
The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Thursday in a case that goes to the heart of the nation's justice system and rule of law: The right to a fair hearing before an impartial judge will be tested. What is promised to litigants and what each person has a right to expect in America is not a judge contaminated by off-the-record hearsay evidence, bribes, or bogus arguments to which the "subject" is not exposed, where he or she is denied notice, confrontation, and cross-examination rights. Secrecy and contamination of the record prevents the exposure of conflicting agendas and incoherence on the part of accusers.
"Guided by the President [Mr. Bush] and his closest advisers, the United States transformed itself from a country that, officially at least, condemned torture to a country that practised it. And this fateful decision, however much we may want it to, WILL NOT GO AWAY, any more than the fourteen 'high value detainees,' TORTURED and thus unprosecutable, will go away. Like the grotesque stories [in] the ICRC report, the decision sits before us, a toxic fact, polluting our political and moral life."
Mark Danner, "US Torture: Voices From the Black Sites," NYRB, March 29, 2009, at p. 77.
This is not the "Democrat's" toture problem. This is one of many catastrophes inherited from the Bush administration's failed terms of office. I admit that at least one of those terms resulted from Republicans winning a popular election. Hence, we must all share the blame for the nightmare of incompetence that has ensued from which we are only now recovering. Mr. Cheney's emergence from his unquiet grave to stalk the night as one of the undead Republican politicians is one indication of just how ludicrous the "strategy" post-9/11 has become.
It took ten years for terrorists to plan 9/11. We cannot say at this point whether we are "safer because no more terrorist incidents occurred after the War on Terror." I suspect that such an attack in response to our torture policy is on its way to us.
We are economically threatened and insecure thanks to Bush's inattention; we are involved in metastisizing military struggles in Iraq and Afghanistan, soon in Pakistan perhaps; embroiled in a global diplomatic and perception morass because of those same tortures in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo -- which have become a recruitment film for Al Qaeda -- even as we declare a war on civil liberties at home. Is there any national problem not captured by the "war" metaphor and military terminology? I hope so. Let's fight a "war for equality in relationships" by promoting gay marriage rights.
Education is faltering; we are the all-time debtor nation on the planet; we overconsume; we are insufficiently attentive to new technologies, theories, imagination; and we discourage creativity in "weird" persons (like me) who do not play golf, but enjoy baking and homemaking.
Blogger, I am told, will be unavailable due to servicing at 4:00 P.M. on Thursday, March 25, 2009. Since today is Thursday, March 26, 2009, I am not sure what this notice means. The blogger notice has now been corrected to reflect the accurate date. Military precision?
"The [U.S. Supreme Court] case involves a brazen -- and so far, successful -- attempt by the Chief Executive of a large local company to overturn a major damage award against his firm. [The owner of the company,] Don Blakenship decided to appeal. But before that [appeal,] he spent an extraordinary $3 MILLION to help elect a member of West Virginia's State Supreme Court, Brent Benjamin."
Mr. Benjamin failed to recuse himself and cast the deciding vote in favor of his "patron's" position, thus throwing out the award against Mr. Blakenship's company. You may as well put a price tag on judicial decisions, government entitlements, political and judicial offices (maybe they do have a price tag in today's America!) -- as they certainly do in New Jersey, where Jim McGreevey and Bob Menendez "go to bat" for those picking up their tabs. Right, Terry Tuchin? Diana Lisa Riccioli? Anne Milgram? Good old Jaynee LaVecchia?
Who was paying you, Terry, and for what services? What did the New Jersey Supreme Court or Attorney General know and when did they know it? How many entities (governmental and non-governmental) were picking up your tab, Terry? What interests -- other than money in your pocket -- did you have for your criminal activities? And did your interests "conflict," Terry? For whom were you really working when violating my rights and helping others to do the same? How many other victims are there, Terry? How many lives have you destroyed, Diana? I am sure that most of your victims are minority group members. Many are probably innocent persons sitting in prisons as a result of politically "convenient" convictions obtained through hypnosis and torture followed by the theft of their property by both of you. How many of you RAPED, Marilyn?
John Yoo and other Bush lawyers rationalized "the use of the military 'to operate domestically.'" In other countries, this is called "totalitarianism"; we call it "creative legal reasoning": "The use of the military envisioned in the [Bush-Gonzales legal memos] appears to [allow] troops to help watch at streets and airports, a familiar sight in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The memorandum discussed the use of MILITARY FORCES to carry out 'raids on terrorist cells' and even seize property."
Seizing property that is held without rights to an accounting or opportunities to recover that property used to be called, "theft." Ignoring the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally bars the military from domestic law enforcement applications, Bush lawyers argued that military forces would be acting in a national security function, not as law enforcement agents. This new military power would include the authority to detain anyone deemed an "enemy combatant" for any reason or no reason, hold the person indefinitely without a hearing or any kind of review, provide no explanations, inform no one. ("What is it like to be tortured?" and "Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey Agency of Torture.")
This policy is very similar to Argentina's laws under the generals. Not surprisingly, this policy is the work of minds similar to those on the far Right in Latin America. The Obama administration has not yet rejected all of these determinations. Let us hope that Mr. Obama will recognize the dangers to civil liberties in these policies and discard them quickly. ("'For America to Lead Again': A Speech for President Barack Obama" and consider Mr. Obama's recent Internet news conference, "The University of America?")
The potential for abuse is astronomical, given the enormity of the power granted to officials operating secretly, without accountability. Lack of accountability is increased with the daily disappearance of newspapers and other "watchdogs." Ideally, so-called journalists can be persuaded to assist in censoring or suppressing the writings of dissidents. Obviously, individuals who will be designated for destruction will be "weirdos" or bizarre intellectuals and eccentrics, especially those who adhere to "Leftist" political ideologies.
The greatest offense of such strange persons in every society is to challenge the boundaries of a hypocritically designated "normality." This "normality" ("law-abiding citizens") is usually defined in convenient ways by officials addicted to power and the violation of the laws that they are sworn to uphold and defend -- like the U.S. Constitution. Cubanoid crypto-Fascists like to speak of "decency" as they commit their crimes.
More surprises are coming to NJ and US corrupt officials, including those benefitting from "Christmas Tree" items in Hudson County who are now working as mayors in some old territories that I know only too well. Mafia arrests are about to lead to new convictions in North Bergen, Union City (how's it going, Brian?), West New York, Guttenberg and elsewhere. It's about time.
"These arguments have become popular among a generation of students who have lost any real taste (or capacity) for dialectics or cogency for that matter. These young people are much too comfortable with the jargon and labels of revolution when they lack the intellectual sophistication or learning to justify their practices or to appreciate from whence they come. As substitutes for thought, there is a false, shallow, trendy set of semi-feminist and progressive labels that are spouted, mostly without content, except that -- in their proponents minds -- these labels and slogans ('he's insensitive to women's issues!') sanction criminality against parental figures or public displays of imbecility. This is not transgressive discourse; it is public stupidity, which is excusable only in the very young."
"Evil, corruption, racism, abuse of power -- are things more difficult to extirpate from societies than 'speech codes' and 'awareness sessions' in the school cafeteria would have you believe. Free speech is not to be sacrificed at the altar of this week's chi-chi platitudes, much less should we endanger fundamental human rights concerns, social justice, or precious Constitutional protections of free speech and worship in order to ensure that not one woman over the age of thirteen is referred to as a 'girl' -- except by another female person, of course. Life is a little messier and social struggles are somewhat more intense that this P.C. jargon would lead you to believe."
"This essay was posted earlier today and has already been vandalized, numerous times. Under the circumstances, I have no alternative but to explore in print or on-line the sexual alliances involving Ms. Milgram or Ms. Poritz that allow these tactics to continue, for years, with the assistance of New Jersey's state government. I will struggle to make necessary repairs in this essay after each alteration."
The foregoing paragraphs are quoted from my Unger essay. I will focus on more allegations of corruption and perversion in New Jersey's legal and political circles. Most N.J. lawyers like both of those things, corruption and perversion. Right, Senator Bob? How's the babe? Is Ms. LiCausi still a "lobbyist" for Xanadu?
