If you are interested in Cuba, stay away from Miami's gangsters and visit:
http://www.revolutionbooksnyc.org/
January 18, 2009 at 4:05 P.M. Hours of obstructions and cyberharassment make it impossible for me to write at my MSN group, Critique. I cannot say whether essays have been vandalized. I am sad and surprised to discover that ideas that I set forth and defended in reviewing the original Shaft movie were, I believe, PLAGIARIZED in today's article by Manohla Dargis & A.O. Scott, "How the Movies Made a President," in The New York Times, January 18, 2009, at p. 1 ("Arts & Leisure"). ("What is it like to be plagiarized?" and "'Brideshead Revisited': A Movie Review.")
I received no acknowledgment, despite the "copyright" and "all rights reserved" notice in my MSN group. How can any journalist be a part of censorship and plagiarism? The New York Times?! Furthermore, I believe Ms. Dargis visited my sites to read my comments on her work in "The Reader': A Movie Review" and "'Revolutionary Road': A Movie Review."
How can someone "like" Ms. Dargis write for The New York Times? Politics? What is the true identity of Ms. Dargis? Ginger Thompson? Bob Menendez? I wonder whether these persons know Daniel Mendelsohn whose essay reviewing "Brideshead Revisited is so similar to mine. ("'Brideshead Revisited': A Mocie Review.")
You need not acknowledge or respect the creative or intellectual work of someone you consider sub-human, according to the Times. You can even plagiarize and try to destroy that person's work because you feel no need to accord to the author the minimal respect to which every person is entitled. Those members of minority groups (like me) who have the temerity to write well or freely need not be accorded due consideration. Under the circumstances, talk directed at me of free speech or ethics is absurd. I am blocking, among other hackers:
http://www.msnusers.com/common/js/1576564590... (NJ?)
If MSN Groups continues to exist and other users can access Critique, assuming that my copyright-protected essays are not being altered, I urge readers to continue to see my work there.
Luis Posada Carriles is an anti-Castro Right-winger, alleged terrorist and sadist.
January 28, 2009 at 12:15 P.M. An attack on my computer connections, disabling my security system, resulted in destroying my child's Internet connection, I believe, also defacing and vandalizing a number of essays -- like this one and others. I will struggle to make the necessary corrections and provide assistance to my child. My opinions and the provisions of the U.S. Constitution have not changed.
January 27, 2009 at 11:03 A.M. My cable signal has been blocked, illegally, and I cannot access my home e-mail account. I suspect that someone did not like this essay. I will continue to struggle to post this work and to write on-line. This censorship and intimidation campaign is unconstitutional and criminal. Regardless of what you think of my opinions, this sort of brutality cannot be allowed to prevail in a free society.
Simon Romero & Damien Cave, "Venezuela Will Push U.S. to Hand Over Man Tied to Plane Bombing," The New York Times, January 23, 2009, at p. A5. ("Damien Cave" suggests that someone has been reading Herman Hesse.)
Jim Holt, "New York Has Become a World Capital of Philosophy," in New York, December 22-29, 2008, at p. 72. (" ... and there's even a sprinkling of Hegelians, Nietzscheans, and phenomenologists at the New School.")
Emily Nussbaum, "Choosing The Gray Lady," in New York, January 19-26, 2009, at p. 28. (Young turks at the Times are not averse to doing "favors" for powerful politicians, allegedly.)
Luis Posada Carriles is sought by the Venezuelan government as a naturalized citizen of that country for acts of terrorism, including the downing of a Cuban civilian airliner with 73 passengers on board. All of the innocent persons travelling on that plane were killed. Their photos appear below. (No images can be posted at blogger because of damage to my computer caused by hackers.) The U.S. government protected Mr. Posada Carriles, as a former C.I.A. agent (allegedly), who was part of the agency's "exploding cigar" efforts against Fidel Castro.
"Mr. Posada, 80, is charged ... with masterminding the bombing of a Cubana Airlines plane as it flew over Barbados, killing all 73 people on board, including dozens of Cuban civilians and a 9-year-old Guyanese girl. It was the Western Hemisphere's first act of midair terrorism, the bloodiest of a series of bombings aimed at weakening Fidel Castro's government."
The U.S. government has taken a radical position against world terrorism, inviting the cooperation of other countries, ostensibly, to punish all terrorists for their crimes. Mr. Posada Carriles happens to be a Right-wing terrorist, allegedly, living happily in Miami, while painting landscapes for a living. This does not sound like a sufficiently macho job for a super anti-Communist. The persons whose lives ended when that airplane fell to earth will not be living into old age, like Posada-Carriles, nor will they enjoy looking at paintings.
Victims' relatives are not concerned about Mr. Posada Carriles' politics or views of Fidel Castro. However, they are disturbed by the hypocrisy of the U.S. government that shelters this man from liability, reportedly, or even from being tried for these heinous offenses. It is impossible to believe that such a man will bring democracy or freedom to any country. Does the N.J. Supreme Court or legal establishment (Senator Bob?) consider Mr. Posada Carriles "ethical" whereas I am not? If so, then I must disagree. ("Is Senator Bob 'For' Human Rights?")
The first "error" inserted in this text since my previous review of the work has been discovered and corrected. This may explain the disabling of my security updating system recently. No doubt other essays have been similarly vandalized by Miami's champions of the "American way of life."
If the concern is that Mr. Posada Carriles will be tortured in Venezuela or Cuba (like persons in Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib) -- if he is returned to either country, Cuban and non-Cuban citizens were among his victims -- then there is nothing to prevent a trial in American federal courts applying international human rights law or Florida criminal law. There are precedents for U.S. courts applying foreign substantive laws, usually in civil cases. Murder laws are pretty much the same all over the world. Murder is a crime even when victims are residents of Communist countries. Preventing me from speaking or accessing the Internet does not change this reality. (The foregoing sentence was altered. I have now restored the deleted word to that sentence.)
Mr. Posada Carriles was photographed visiting U.S. federal courts on a prior occasion. (Images may be blocked by New Jersey's Cubanoids.)
The main reason that Mr. Posada Carriles and his ilk have escaped liability, so far, is an alleged affiliation with Cuban-American politicians, like New Jersey's Senator Robert "Bob" Menendez. ("Senator Bob, the Babe, and the Big Bucks" and "Does Senator Menendez Have Mafia Friends?") Also, Big "Mel" Martinez, former Florida Republicano Senator, is an alleged "friend" of these paramilitary anti-Castro groups. This is something I can neither confirm nor deny at this time. Mr. Menendez has issued a press release stating that he is "for all the people." Is Ginger Thompson of the Times is related to Manohla Dargis? See what purports to be the English language article, Ginger Thompson, "Couple's Capitol Ties Said to Veil Spying for Cuba," in The New York Times, June 19, 2009, at p. 1. (Ms. Thompson's creative use of the English language defies description by me.)
I wonder whether Ginger Thompson and Manohla Dargis are "friends"? Or are they the same person? Jean Paul Rathbone? Do you wish to delete a word from one of my sentences, again?
Have either of those men, Menendez or Martinez -- whether directly or indirectly -- received political contributions in any manner from Mr. Posada Carriles and/or any organization espousing anti-Castro views that has opposed extradition of Mr. Posada Carriles? If so, then should these Senators and other Cuban-American politicians not refrain from taking any stand (publicly or privately) concerning this extradition request, in order to preserve the appearance at least of disinterested decision-making with regard to such matters on the part of the federal judiciary and Congress? I suspect so. ("Menendez" has been changed several times to "Memendez.")
Radical Right-wing Cubanazos have been rumored to engage in organized crime in order to collect funds for their anti-Castro efforts. I suspect that organized crime by any groups is about collecting funds for themselves.
Realistically, I doubt that Mr. Posada Carriles will be extradited by the U.S. or charged with any crimes that bear a rational relationship to his alleged actions. I am aware of his legal experiences and charges in Louisiana. This absolution will have the effect of diminishing or destroying U.S. credibility on terrorism throughout the world by making it clear to everyone that Americans have a double standard depending on the political views of the terrorists in question or the identities of their victims. This essay usually produces either a death threat or interference with my computer's cable signal. ("Cubanazos Pose a Threat to National Security!" and "Miami's Cubanoids Protest Against Peace!")
Right-wing anti-Castro forces or quasi-military groups operate with impunity -- or with the assistance of corrupt politicians in places like New Jersey -- who then censor Constitutionally protected speech, like my blogs, whereas all Arab political groups and Leftist intellectuals, as well as activists, can count on harassment and worse from "protected goons" serving in New Jersey's legislature or judiciary. Is this "ethical," Mr. Menendez?
Forty minutes of harassment preceded my writing efforts today. Cyberattacks have mostly damaged my family members' efforts to make use of Internet resources. About one out of fifty hits at my blogs are counted. I am illegally prevented from accessing MSN groups. My books are suppressed in America. I am plagiarized and denied publication opportunities. I understand that my writings are being read outside the U.S. and, especially, in Cuba and China. I am grateful for this attention.
My second book, specifically, is suppressed and not sent to on-line booksellers, even as I am still prohibited from accessing MSN groups, every morning, if that site still exists. These censorship and suppression efforts are made possible by state action and are, I believe, content-based. I wonder whether there is a "connection" to Ms. Dargis from the Cuban-American community?
My response to the continuing harassment and insertions of "errors" is a long awaited essay on further corruption in the Garden State. The opinion of Mr. Posada-Carriles concerning my "ethics" does not trouble me. I say the same concerning the views of Mr. Menendez. ("Is Senator Bob 'For' Human Rights?" and "Senator Bob Struggles to Find His conscience.")
All Cuban-American politicians -- including the befuddled Congresswoman from Miami who hung up on President Obama, Iliana Ross-Lehtinen ("Who knew it was really him calling little-old-me?") -- are expected to anounce publicly, on a daily basis, that they are "against Communism" and in favor of "censorship-of-socialist-weird-people-who-refuse-to-live-in-Miami-or-Miami-Beach." ("Is Senator Menendez a Suspect in Mafia-Political Murder in New Jersey?")
Among the likely co-conspirators are "Lincoln" Diaz Balart, former Florida politician and "firebrand" in the "struggle against Communism" and friends, like "Jose" Diaz-Balart, who is a less intelligent version of Lincoln Diaz-Balart. That's not saying much, Jose. It should sadden you to think that the name "Lincoln" can be attached to any kind of suppression of freedoms or to the persons who favor such totalitarianism, allegedly.
I am afraid that the category of "weird" persons includes me, according to many Cubanazos and Cubanazas. Here is a gold medallion for you, plastic covers for the couch, and a nice Guayavera. These are unisex items. Mazeltov. (Again: "Cubanazos Pose a Threat to National Security" and "Miami's Cubanoids Protest Against Peace!")
Congresswoman Ross-Lehtinen favors the death penalty for Communists, allegedly, also for liberals and advocates for the environment and/or persons adopting non-traditional lifestyles. Ms. Ross-Lehtinen is undecided concerning the possible execution of Jon Stewart and Bill Maher as well as other liberal commentators and/or "Godless, pinko, semi-Communists!" (Well, she had to be right about something!)
The Congresswoman is not on record as favoring the extradition of Mr. Posada Carriles, despite the heinous crimes alleged against him. Is the Congresswoman getting soft on criminals? Does Ms. Ross-Lehtinen's attitude to criminals depend on the criminal's politics? ("And How!")
Pictures of dozens killed who are only some of the alleged victims of Mr. Posada Carriles' "activities" are available on-line. The response from the Cuban-American community in Union City and Miami has been amused indifference: "Boys will be boys ..." said one promiment politician from West New York, New Jersey -- who is, perhaps, a former gym teacher. Mr. Albio Sires is rumored to have insisted that opposing candidates "drop and do fifty pushups!" This is a man we need in the U.S. Congress.
The terror victims' family members did not laugh merrily over this alleged display of humor and wit.
I am told that someone called "Leslie Martinez," Cubanaza-Republicana and advocate (allegedly) of "public executions" and "conspicuous consumption" in the vicinity of the University of Miami, insisted that we "must get tough on crime," but not on "alleged" Right-wing Cuban-American criminals or terrorists, since (allegedly) they are not Communists, or Arabs. Shopping, Leslie? Let me guess: You live in Coral Gables?
I am sure that Ms. Martinez is "for" the First Amendment and all Constitutional rights for persons like herself. I wonder whether Ms. Martinez knows "Manohla Dargis"? ("What is it like to be plagiarized?") Perhaps Jim Holt has also met Ms. Dargis and/or Benedict Carey, Ginger Thompson maybe?
Mr. Holt appears to be dismissive of the "sprinkling" of phenomenologists and hermeneuticists who constitute a large portion of students of Western thought in the world, whether in Latin America, Europe or Asia. They are not analytical philosophers or American pragmatists. Hence, there is no need to take such philosophies (or philosophers) seriously. Right, Jim? Jim has been to Columbia University. This entitles Jim to explain such things to the rest of us. Isn't that right, Mr. Holt?
Attacks against this essay and all essays at my sites will be constant. Chinese philosophers are in need of Mr. Holt's instruction, along with those lesser persons (like myself) who presume to contribute to phenomenological-hermeneutics because, naively, we believe that this theoretical approach is vital and important today. A collection of essays dealing with China's enagement with phenomenology-hermeneutics and Marxism is available. I suggest a glance at Derrida's Specters of Marx.
Is it possible that any journalist at The New York Times would be a part of censorship and suppressions of speech efforts? I can only hope that no writer would contribute to such criminality.
Showing posts with label Cubanazos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cubanazos. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Why Censorship Must Not Win.
November 3, 2008 at 10:01 A.M. (according to my computer). I was just barred from my group, then I lost my net access. I will struggle to reach my group throughout the day, then I will do my best to repair the harm done to essays during this interval. I am in receipt of a note, purporting to come from my friend Jason, advising me of MSN Groups "real" closing.
I am reminded also of a Supreme Court case in which a university chose to create a separate law school for one student, when the African-American candidate was granted admission to the law school by the U.S. Supremes, rather than to integrate their facility. MSN groups will close to shelter the Jersey Boys from criticism? Let us hope not. I will continue to search for an alternative site. Images still cannot be posted at blogger or with my profile. Perhaps it is time to reconsider First Amendment law. I am more nervous about unfettered Democrat party control of government. Let us hope for the best.
November 2, 2008 at 9:07 P.M. There was interference with my wireless access, depriving other users also of access. My service was just restored. I cannot say, at this point, how many writings have been damaged or how extensively. Essays examining New Jersey Municipal Law practice and profiles of old "friends" -- who are now illustrious members of the judiciary, some by very interesting means -- will be my response to these tactics. I can never be sure of regaining access to this blog or that my work will not be destroyed. I will continue to write.
November 1, 2008 at 12:44 A.M. "Skinny People Dressed in Black" was altered overnight. I made necessary corrections. I will continue to try to deal with the harassment efforts directed against my sites. Any news on the N.J. indictments front?
October 30, 2007 at 8:28 A.M. I was just obstructed in efforts to reach MSN. I will keep trying throughout the day.
October 29, 2008 at 8:25 A.M. Several attempts to reach my MSN group were prevented this morning. My computer was frozen, attacks will be constant today. This may mean that indictments are being handed down by the feds in New Jersey. I am afraid that this sort of cyberattack usually means that essays are being vandalized, altered, damaged. I will do my best to make repairs when I get back to Critique.
I continue to receive notices that MSN Groups is "closing" as of February 21, 2009. I will continue to struggle to write until that date, then I will transfer the essays at that site to another location where images can be posted. My image-posting feature at blogger is still disabled. I will run scans all day.
October 28, 2008 at 8:52 A.M. My computer security system was disabled yesterday for about one hour, presumably by hackers. As a result, any number of essays may have been altered, defaced, deleted or otherwise damaged. I was just prevented from accessing my group at MSN, which usually means that "errors" are being inserted in my writings. I will do my best to return to that site and make corrections. (See "Senator Bob, the Babe, and the Big Bucks" and "Does Senator Menendez Have Mafia Friends?")
Judith Butler, Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence (London & New York: Verso, 2004), p. 83.
Kurt Vonnegut, Palm Sunday (New York: Laurel, 1984), p. 3.
Fidel Castro, "Letter to the Court of Appeals," in Revolutionary Struggle: The Selected Works of Fidel Castro (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972), p. 163.
Guillermo Cabrera Infante, "Castroenteritis," in Mea Cuba (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1994), pp. 279-329.
I am including a photograph of Fidel Castro and Castro's great friend, Richard M. Nixon (at MSN), because the photo of Che Guevara in dialogue with Jean Paul Sartre was blocked today at Critique. I am sure that use of the photo in a discussion of censorship will infuriate the "Cubanazos" even more than Guevara chatting with Sartre and De Beauvoir. I say this as an opponent of Castro's policies and, for that matter, of Nixon's policies. I will not be intimidated or "conditioned" into abandoning my opinions. I cannot be threatened or silenced by anyone.
I have spent several hours today -- October 19, 2008 -- being denied access to my own sites, blocked, obstructed, seeing my essays altered, defaced, vandalized and having to regain Internet access, painfully, only to be blocked once more. This deliberate effort to suppress speech, to inflict mental suffering through frustration, suffering inflicted on a person known to have endured nearly two decades of psychological torture -- including every form of secret violation of his human rights -- all to control a person, a human being who has committed no crime, can only take place with the cooperation of the authorities in an American jurisdiction. This is the saddest realization for me.
Whatever this is called and however it may be rationalized, it can only be described as sadism and evil. There is no form of cruelty that is for a person's -- or victim's -- "own good." Don't supply yourself (NJ) with any fig leafs. You hurt people because you like hurting people. You are not and never have been any kind of therapist or legal official. You are evil. You like being evil. You will also be punished for what you have done, eventually. I have to hope that this is true. You will not prevent me from speaking. You will not silence me. You will not stop me from criticizing a corrupt and inept legal system in New Jersey that makes this daily horror possible. ("Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture" and "What is it like to be tortured?")
I can not understand or forgive the guilty bystanders who allow this atrocity to continue, either out of fear or complicity with evil. You must share responsibility and guilt for these crimes -- even as the institutions of New Jersey must share in the stench of these foul deeds. I will continue to try to regain access to my sites. I don't seem able to remove an icon from my desk top labeled "Launch Internet Explorer 4." I do not know what this means, or if it means anything, but I will keep fighting. Maybe indictments are finally being handed down in this matter. It's about time. I cannot be certain whether MSN Groups is "closing" in February, 2009. Several notices to this effect have been sent to me. I doubt it.
As a law student, I discovered a special interest in First Amendment jurisprudence. I was fortunate to attend a seminar dealing with this area of American Constitutional law. I believe that the principle of freedom of speech is a magnificent and always endangered aspect of American society for which we must struggle every day. You do not suppress the speech of your neighbor, even if you disagree or regard that speech (or any form of expression) as more than mistaken. You should express your own opinions -- hopefully, these exchanges of opinions can be civil -- while avoiding the assassination of your political antagonists. This refraining from violence will disappoint the "Cubanazos" (of all genders). ("Why U.S. Courts Must Not Condone Torture.")
"Agreement on disagreement" is the essential requirement in a democracy and free society. If you can't make that commitment -- or if you fail to see that such tolerance for dissent and disagreement is a matter of right -- then you will never be a free person, much less will you be in a position to bring "freedom" to others. This is especially intended for the Cuban-American Right-wingers and their political protection in Florida and New Jersey. You can't beat up ideas.
Over this past weekend, I have made corrections of a single essay -- previously corrected dozens of times -- where the "errors" inserted were not to be found in earlier printed versions of the same text. The goal of these efforts -- part of a long series of crimes committed against me -- is to bring about a kind of collapse through despair and frustration. I feel stronger and more determined after such experiences. First Amendment violations are much worse when they are committed or made possible by "state action." It doesn't take much to establish the necessary state action. Anne Milgram? Senator Bob?
I will focus on further allegations of corruption, criminality, fraud, mendacity and bias in the New Jersey legal system. I will make certain to disseminate those charges against Garden State law and lawyers, as widely as possible, through the Internet. I will make it a project to attack that corrupt legal system, to chip away at the courts and officials of that foul-smelling turf for the rest of my life. I suspect that there are forces amplifying my critique already. I am sure that there will be more such assistance. Given the opportunity to do so, I will speak publicly of these matters. (See "New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal System" and "New Jersey's Feces-Covered Supreme Court.") My discussions will always be supported by objective sources and solid research in legal materials.
The Constitution of the United States of America, First Amendment, remains a marvel of the world and a great humanistic achievement, equalled in a tiny number of other societies (perhaps) and surpassed in none. That magnificent document is almost a miracle in the history of human political and legal life. Here is what the First Amendment says concerning speech:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free excercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The principle was applied to the states through the "due process" clauses of the 4th and 14th Amendments. Like Justice Hugo Black, I am pretty generous in First Amendment disputes in favor of the free expression principle as well as the autonomy of every human conscience -- especially when it comes to political controversies -- because free speech is at the heart of our democracy. American society has made a public commitment to this idea. We have sacrificed human lives to defend this freedom. America set an example for the world during two centuries and more. America's exemplary status may now have been lost. I am "petitioning the government for a redress of some grievances."
People have gone to prison rather than surrender their free speech rights or other fundamental rights which are essential to their humanity, like privacy and self-determination. I will not abandon my right to speak freely. I will not be conditioned into refraining from criticizing the New Jersey mafia and/or their political protection. I will not legitimate the crimes committed against me or the incompetence of the tribunals that have allowed this twenty-year odyssey to continue for much too long. Mr. Rabner, these crimes must be placed at your doorstep.
October 28, 2008 at 9:05 A.M. efforts to reach my MSN group were obstructed this morning. This essay was posted at Critique and vandalized overnight. At this time, I am unable to post the corrected version of the text. However, I will spend the rest of the day and night in an effort to do so. It will be defaced, once again. I will continue to revise and re-post it, against all obstructions. (See "Censorship and Cruelty in New Jersey" and "What is it like to be tortured?")
New Jersey has relinquished any authority to speak of "ethics" in tainted and increasingly meaningless, bought and paid for legal proceedings in the most corrupt jurisdiction in the nation. (See "New Jersey is the Home of the Living Dead" and "How Censorship Works in America.") Writing to fundamentalist would-be censors of his books, Kurt Vonnegut said:
"It may be that the most striking thing about members of my literary generation in retrospect will be that we were allowed to say absolutely anything without fear of punishment. Our American heirs may find it incredible, as most foreigners do right now, that a nation would want to enforce as a law something which sounds more like a dream, ... "
Free speech has become only a dream (or a lie?), much too often, thanks to the latest technologies of surveillance and control as well as the sadism that they feed. Internet texts are subject to alteration (very easily) with the resources of government. This essay has been revised several times, thus far, after "errors" mysteriously appeared in the text. Journalists should take heed. The practices directed against me will be used soon against large publications. This struggle -- my daily fight for the oxygen of freedom -- will soon be shared by my literary friends on the margins of America's political conversation.
October 27, 2008 at 7:01 P.M. my computer's clock shows "5:58 P.M." as the time. I wonder what happened during the hour or so that the clock and my security system, perhaps, were not working? Have any essays been altered by hackers today? What a shock that would be!
My right to speak and your right of access to my words are inseparable. This very text is written without the certainty that I will be able to reach my sites in order to post it. Worse, I anticipate the daily wars that will be fought by me to repair and restore the essay -- after many insertions of "errors" and defacements -- intended to further harm a person who can only be described as a "tortured dissident." I dread the thought that such psychological torture of a person is aided and abetted (for a small fee) by so-called journalists or political party "soldiers," along with members of the bar in any American jursidiction. Writing of the revolution in American jurisprudential understandings after 9/11, Judith Butler says:
"The U.S. shows contempt for its own constitution and the protocols of international law in relegating law to an instrumentality of the state and suspending law in the interests of the state. When a reporter asked the DOD [Department of Defense] representatives why a military tribunal system was required, given that both a civil court and a military court system already exist, they responded that they needed another "instrument," given the new circumstances. The law is not that to which the state is subject nor that which distinguishes between lawful state action and unlawful, but is now expressly understood as an instrument, an instrumentality of power, one that can be applied and suspended at will." -- This was the view of Dr. Goebbels in Nazi Germany. -- "Sovereignty consists now in the variable application, contortion, and suspension of the law; it is, in its current form, a relation to law: exploitative, instrumental, disdainful, preemptory, arbitrary."
Press reports indicate that American military forces have carried out raids resulting in the killing of an alleged terrorist in Syria, a non-combatant nation, also in Pakistan (a country that is ostensibly assisting the U.S. in the "War on Terror"), both actions are clear violations of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of nations at peace with the United States.
Eight civilians were killed in Syria, including women and children. The number of persons killed in Pakistan is not reported. No expression of condolences or offers of compensation have been forthcoming from American officials. There has been no prominent discussion in the U.S. media of these crimes committed by Americans. My fight against New Jersey's censorship and state criminality is a pretty lonely one sometimes. America's military action weakens the previously pro-U.S. -- or at least neutral -- governments in those countries and strengthens Islamic fundamentalist factions.
" ... in justifying the attack American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense that provided a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries' consent."
Eric Schmitt & Thom Shanker, "Officials Say U.S. Killed an Iraqui in Raid in Syria," in The New York Times, October 28, 2008, at p. A1.
If Russia, for example, determined that a wanted terrorist was living in Scranton, Pennsylvania, then sent elite military forces into the U.S. on a mission to kill the person and "took out" a dozen more civilians who happened to be standing by, then explained that this was a matter of Russia's definition of their national security, would we agree that the action is legitimate? I doubt it.
These countries that were previously neutral -- bear this point in mind -- whose intelligence agencies may not have given assistance to anti-American factions before, will certainly do so now. Furthermore, they will establish relations with other countries that feel "aggrieved" in Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East to sponsor actions harmful of American interests, probably within the next five years.
The animosity directed at the current U.S. government will come back to haunt all of us (and our children) for many years to come in the form of economic harm as well as quasi-military strikes at U.S. targets in the world. I do not believe that current military actions will make us safer. I am sure that they make the world a more dangerous place for everyone, especially women and children in many countries. You can be sure that people in several countries are thinking of ways to repeat the Abu Ghraib horrors with Americans as victims, probably right here in New York.
My daily encounter with (I believe) government-protected forces for censorship in America is being seen by many persons in the world. This makes a lie of America's Constitution and undermines our credibility in free speech and all human rights cases. I realize that many Right-wing Cuban-American paramilitary groups do not approve of my opinions because they are insufficiently hostile to the Cuban people or any people. I admit to disapproving of the mafia. I do not ask that persons approve of my opinions or agree with them. I am merely seeking to use my right to speak freely in protest of torture and suppression of speech as well as years of abuse at the hands of politically powerful persons. I will continue to struggle to do exactly that. (See "Letter From a Torture Chamber" and "What is it like to be tortured?" as well as "Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture.")
I will do my best to return to MSN and repair the harm done to my writings during this period of obstruction and denials of access to my own work. The anticipated response from the forces engaged in this censorship effort will be to crank up the slander machine. Incidents in my life from infancy will be twisted into insults and disseminated as "personal attacks." At this point, even such an effort at character assassination coupled with economic harm may backfire against my adversaries in the Garden State.
I am reminded also of a Supreme Court case in which a university chose to create a separate law school for one student, when the African-American candidate was granted admission to the law school by the U.S. Supremes, rather than to integrate their facility. MSN groups will close to shelter the Jersey Boys from criticism? Let us hope not. I will continue to search for an alternative site. Images still cannot be posted at blogger or with my profile. Perhaps it is time to reconsider First Amendment law. I am more nervous about unfettered Democrat party control of government. Let us hope for the best.
November 2, 2008 at 9:07 P.M. There was interference with my wireless access, depriving other users also of access. My service was just restored. I cannot say, at this point, how many writings have been damaged or how extensively. Essays examining New Jersey Municipal Law practice and profiles of old "friends" -- who are now illustrious members of the judiciary, some by very interesting means -- will be my response to these tactics. I can never be sure of regaining access to this blog or that my work will not be destroyed. I will continue to write.
November 1, 2008 at 12:44 A.M. "Skinny People Dressed in Black" was altered overnight. I made necessary corrections. I will continue to try to deal with the harassment efforts directed against my sites. Any news on the N.J. indictments front?
October 30, 2007 at 8:28 A.M. I was just obstructed in efforts to reach MSN. I will keep trying throughout the day.
October 29, 2008 at 8:25 A.M. Several attempts to reach my MSN group were prevented this morning. My computer was frozen, attacks will be constant today. This may mean that indictments are being handed down by the feds in New Jersey. I am afraid that this sort of cyberattack usually means that essays are being vandalized, altered, damaged. I will do my best to make repairs when I get back to Critique.
I continue to receive notices that MSN Groups is "closing" as of February 21, 2009. I will continue to struggle to write until that date, then I will transfer the essays at that site to another location where images can be posted. My image-posting feature at blogger is still disabled. I will run scans all day.
October 28, 2008 at 8:52 A.M. My computer security system was disabled yesterday for about one hour, presumably by hackers. As a result, any number of essays may have been altered, defaced, deleted or otherwise damaged. I was just prevented from accessing my group at MSN, which usually means that "errors" are being inserted in my writings. I will do my best to return to that site and make corrections. (See "Senator Bob, the Babe, and the Big Bucks" and "Does Senator Menendez Have Mafia Friends?")
Judith Butler, Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence (London & New York: Verso, 2004), p. 83.
Kurt Vonnegut, Palm Sunday (New York: Laurel, 1984), p. 3.
Fidel Castro, "Letter to the Court of Appeals," in Revolutionary Struggle: The Selected Works of Fidel Castro (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972), p. 163.
Guillermo Cabrera Infante, "Castroenteritis," in Mea Cuba (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1994), pp. 279-329.
I am including a photograph of Fidel Castro and Castro's great friend, Richard M. Nixon (at MSN), because the photo of Che Guevara in dialogue with Jean Paul Sartre was blocked today at Critique. I am sure that use of the photo in a discussion of censorship will infuriate the "Cubanazos" even more than Guevara chatting with Sartre and De Beauvoir. I say this as an opponent of Castro's policies and, for that matter, of Nixon's policies. I will not be intimidated or "conditioned" into abandoning my opinions. I cannot be threatened or silenced by anyone.
I have spent several hours today -- October 19, 2008 -- being denied access to my own sites, blocked, obstructed, seeing my essays altered, defaced, vandalized and having to regain Internet access, painfully, only to be blocked once more. This deliberate effort to suppress speech, to inflict mental suffering through frustration, suffering inflicted on a person known to have endured nearly two decades of psychological torture -- including every form of secret violation of his human rights -- all to control a person, a human being who has committed no crime, can only take place with the cooperation of the authorities in an American jurisdiction. This is the saddest realization for me.
Whatever this is called and however it may be rationalized, it can only be described as sadism and evil. There is no form of cruelty that is for a person's -- or victim's -- "own good." Don't supply yourself (NJ) with any fig leafs. You hurt people because you like hurting people. You are not and never have been any kind of therapist or legal official. You are evil. You like being evil. You will also be punished for what you have done, eventually. I have to hope that this is true. You will not prevent me from speaking. You will not silence me. You will not stop me from criticizing a corrupt and inept legal system in New Jersey that makes this daily horror possible. ("Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture" and "What is it like to be tortured?")
I can not understand or forgive the guilty bystanders who allow this atrocity to continue, either out of fear or complicity with evil. You must share responsibility and guilt for these crimes -- even as the institutions of New Jersey must share in the stench of these foul deeds. I will continue to try to regain access to my sites. I don't seem able to remove an icon from my desk top labeled "Launch Internet Explorer 4." I do not know what this means, or if it means anything, but I will keep fighting. Maybe indictments are finally being handed down in this matter. It's about time. I cannot be certain whether MSN Groups is "closing" in February, 2009. Several notices to this effect have been sent to me. I doubt it.
As a law student, I discovered a special interest in First Amendment jurisprudence. I was fortunate to attend a seminar dealing with this area of American Constitutional law. I believe that the principle of freedom of speech is a magnificent and always endangered aspect of American society for which we must struggle every day. You do not suppress the speech of your neighbor, even if you disagree or regard that speech (or any form of expression) as more than mistaken. You should express your own opinions -- hopefully, these exchanges of opinions can be civil -- while avoiding the assassination of your political antagonists. This refraining from violence will disappoint the "Cubanazos" (of all genders). ("Why U.S. Courts Must Not Condone Torture.")
"Agreement on disagreement" is the essential requirement in a democracy and free society. If you can't make that commitment -- or if you fail to see that such tolerance for dissent and disagreement is a matter of right -- then you will never be a free person, much less will you be in a position to bring "freedom" to others. This is especially intended for the Cuban-American Right-wingers and their political protection in Florida and New Jersey. You can't beat up ideas.
Over this past weekend, I have made corrections of a single essay -- previously corrected dozens of times -- where the "errors" inserted were not to be found in earlier printed versions of the same text. The goal of these efforts -- part of a long series of crimes committed against me -- is to bring about a kind of collapse through despair and frustration. I feel stronger and more determined after such experiences. First Amendment violations are much worse when they are committed or made possible by "state action." It doesn't take much to establish the necessary state action. Anne Milgram? Senator Bob?
I will focus on further allegations of corruption, criminality, fraud, mendacity and bias in the New Jersey legal system. I will make certain to disseminate those charges against Garden State law and lawyers, as widely as possible, through the Internet. I will make it a project to attack that corrupt legal system, to chip away at the courts and officials of that foul-smelling turf for the rest of my life. I suspect that there are forces amplifying my critique already. I am sure that there will be more such assistance. Given the opportunity to do so, I will speak publicly of these matters. (See "New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal System" and "New Jersey's Feces-Covered Supreme Court.") My discussions will always be supported by objective sources and solid research in legal materials.
The Constitution of the United States of America, First Amendment, remains a marvel of the world and a great humanistic achievement, equalled in a tiny number of other societies (perhaps) and surpassed in none. That magnificent document is almost a miracle in the history of human political and legal life. Here is what the First Amendment says concerning speech:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free excercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The principle was applied to the states through the "due process" clauses of the 4th and 14th Amendments. Like Justice Hugo Black, I am pretty generous in First Amendment disputes in favor of the free expression principle as well as the autonomy of every human conscience -- especially when it comes to political controversies -- because free speech is at the heart of our democracy. American society has made a public commitment to this idea. We have sacrificed human lives to defend this freedom. America set an example for the world during two centuries and more. America's exemplary status may now have been lost. I am "petitioning the government for a redress of some grievances."
People have gone to prison rather than surrender their free speech rights or other fundamental rights which are essential to their humanity, like privacy and self-determination. I will not abandon my right to speak freely. I will not be conditioned into refraining from criticizing the New Jersey mafia and/or their political protection. I will not legitimate the crimes committed against me or the incompetence of the tribunals that have allowed this twenty-year odyssey to continue for much too long. Mr. Rabner, these crimes must be placed at your doorstep.
October 28, 2008 at 9:05 A.M. efforts to reach my MSN group were obstructed this morning. This essay was posted at Critique and vandalized overnight. At this time, I am unable to post the corrected version of the text. However, I will spend the rest of the day and night in an effort to do so. It will be defaced, once again. I will continue to revise and re-post it, against all obstructions. (See "Censorship and Cruelty in New Jersey" and "What is it like to be tortured?")
New Jersey has relinquished any authority to speak of "ethics" in tainted and increasingly meaningless, bought and paid for legal proceedings in the most corrupt jurisdiction in the nation. (See "New Jersey is the Home of the Living Dead" and "How Censorship Works in America.") Writing to fundamentalist would-be censors of his books, Kurt Vonnegut said:
"It may be that the most striking thing about members of my literary generation in retrospect will be that we were allowed to say absolutely anything without fear of punishment. Our American heirs may find it incredible, as most foreigners do right now, that a nation would want to enforce as a law something which sounds more like a dream, ... "
Free speech has become only a dream (or a lie?), much too often, thanks to the latest technologies of surveillance and control as well as the sadism that they feed. Internet texts are subject to alteration (very easily) with the resources of government. This essay has been revised several times, thus far, after "errors" mysteriously appeared in the text. Journalists should take heed. The practices directed against me will be used soon against large publications. This struggle -- my daily fight for the oxygen of freedom -- will soon be shared by my literary friends on the margins of America's political conversation.
October 27, 2008 at 7:01 P.M. my computer's clock shows "5:58 P.M." as the time. I wonder what happened during the hour or so that the clock and my security system, perhaps, were not working? Have any essays been altered by hackers today? What a shock that would be!
My right to speak and your right of access to my words are inseparable. This very text is written without the certainty that I will be able to reach my sites in order to post it. Worse, I anticipate the daily wars that will be fought by me to repair and restore the essay -- after many insertions of "errors" and defacements -- intended to further harm a person who can only be described as a "tortured dissident." I dread the thought that such psychological torture of a person is aided and abetted (for a small fee) by so-called journalists or political party "soldiers," along with members of the bar in any American jursidiction. Writing of the revolution in American jurisprudential understandings after 9/11, Judith Butler says:
"The U.S. shows contempt for its own constitution and the protocols of international law in relegating law to an instrumentality of the state and suspending law in the interests of the state. When a reporter asked the DOD [Department of Defense] representatives why a military tribunal system was required, given that both a civil court and a military court system already exist, they responded that they needed another "instrument," given the new circumstances. The law is not that to which the state is subject nor that which distinguishes between lawful state action and unlawful, but is now expressly understood as an instrument, an instrumentality of power, one that can be applied and suspended at will." -- This was the view of Dr. Goebbels in Nazi Germany. -- "Sovereignty consists now in the variable application, contortion, and suspension of the law; it is, in its current form, a relation to law: exploitative, instrumental, disdainful, preemptory, arbitrary."
Press reports indicate that American military forces have carried out raids resulting in the killing of an alleged terrorist in Syria, a non-combatant nation, also in Pakistan (a country that is ostensibly assisting the U.S. in the "War on Terror"), both actions are clear violations of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of nations at peace with the United States.
Eight civilians were killed in Syria, including women and children. The number of persons killed in Pakistan is not reported. No expression of condolences or offers of compensation have been forthcoming from American officials. There has been no prominent discussion in the U.S. media of these crimes committed by Americans. My fight against New Jersey's censorship and state criminality is a pretty lonely one sometimes. America's military action weakens the previously pro-U.S. -- or at least neutral -- governments in those countries and strengthens Islamic fundamentalist factions.
" ... in justifying the attack American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense that provided a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries' consent."
Eric Schmitt & Thom Shanker, "Officials Say U.S. Killed an Iraqui in Raid in Syria," in The New York Times, October 28, 2008, at p. A1.
If Russia, for example, determined that a wanted terrorist was living in Scranton, Pennsylvania, then sent elite military forces into the U.S. on a mission to kill the person and "took out" a dozen more civilians who happened to be standing by, then explained that this was a matter of Russia's definition of their national security, would we agree that the action is legitimate? I doubt it.
These countries that were previously neutral -- bear this point in mind -- whose intelligence agencies may not have given assistance to anti-American factions before, will certainly do so now. Furthermore, they will establish relations with other countries that feel "aggrieved" in Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East to sponsor actions harmful of American interests, probably within the next five years.
The animosity directed at the current U.S. government will come back to haunt all of us (and our children) for many years to come in the form of economic harm as well as quasi-military strikes at U.S. targets in the world. I do not believe that current military actions will make us safer. I am sure that they make the world a more dangerous place for everyone, especially women and children in many countries. You can be sure that people in several countries are thinking of ways to repeat the Abu Ghraib horrors with Americans as victims, probably right here in New York.
My daily encounter with (I believe) government-protected forces for censorship in America is being seen by many persons in the world. This makes a lie of America's Constitution and undermines our credibility in free speech and all human rights cases. I realize that many Right-wing Cuban-American paramilitary groups do not approve of my opinions because they are insufficiently hostile to the Cuban people or any people. I admit to disapproving of the mafia. I do not ask that persons approve of my opinions or agree with them. I am merely seeking to use my right to speak freely in protest of torture and suppression of speech as well as years of abuse at the hands of politically powerful persons. I will continue to struggle to do exactly that. (See "Letter From a Torture Chamber" and "What is it like to be tortured?" as well as "Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture.")
I will do my best to return to MSN and repair the harm done to my writings during this period of obstruction and denials of access to my own work. The anticipated response from the forces engaged in this censorship effort will be to crank up the slander machine. Incidents in my life from infancy will be twisted into insults and disseminated as "personal attacks." At this point, even such an effort at character assassination coupled with economic harm may backfire against my adversaries in the Garden State.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)