yet another blog

As of Sunday 3rd (i.e., the day after tomorrow!) don’t expect much activity either on this blog or my photoblog for a few days. Well, prob’ly closer to a coupla weeks actually.
For I be off on my rambles again. This time to the Climate Camp that’s even now in process of being set up near Kingsnorth Power Station in northeast Kent.

Well, I say “in process of being set up”. That’s when they can manage to do the setting up in between bully-boy incursions by the local Gestapo… um, sorry, I meant political police. Um… no, what I actually meant was “officers of Kent’s constabulary”.

Apparently, within 24 hours or so of the site being “claimed” the local boys in blue swarmed all over the place, searching, using pepper spray, arresting, and generally being a bit intimidatory. Nothing new there then.

No doubt they saw it as payback time for when a police incursion was made at the Climate Camp last year, situated near Heathrow.
A detachment of cops marched on… and were very promptly marched off again by the assembled campers, who quite rightly objected to such arrogant tactics. A few red faces in the cop canteen that night probably.
In fact, thinking about it, the cops didn’t have a very good time of it last year. What with being unceremoniously ejected from the Camp and then, in Harmondsworth village, the lovely Chief Inspector Pendry sending a detachment of riot cops away with a flea in their ear (see this), they’ve got a lot of ground to make up.
Which is to say nothing of one cop being thrown from her horse in the “Battle of the Beanfield”.

So, this time around they have apparently managed to seize a number of items that they claim could be used to cause criminal damage, including such offensive things as kids’ crayons and a couple of board games. Wow!
And that’s to say nothing of their seizure of stuff intended to help construct the camp and make it a relatively comfortable, safe, and hygienic place for later arrivals. (Bearing in mind its not just your hardened activist that comes to Climate Camp, but also folk who simply want to find out about the issues, or learn the skills required to develop an environmentally friendly and sustainable lifestyle, and elderly people, and disabled folk, and kids… in other words, a fairly representative cross-section of society as a whole.)

This article on Indymedia has the full story.

Yet the Camp’s not toally without supporters in the Establishment. Check out this article by the parliamentarian Chris Davies published in today’s Guardian newspaper, which also gives some background to the issues that the Camp’s all about.

Of course, there’s a subtext to this recent escapade by the cops. Quite aside from any “legitimate” reason they may claim to have for such heavy-handed policing, one can’t help but wonder whether part of their ploy is not just to “assert their authority” but also to deter others from coming to the Camp.
That motivation (i.e., the suppression of political dissent and activism) quite clearly has a large part to play in their deployment of FIT officers at “political” events, so its reasonable to suppose that such motivation may well have informed this recent “raid”.

So when are they gonna wake up and realise that if anything it just makes the committed activist even more determined to act, as much in protest against the repression as against the issue at hand.

And talking of FIT, fitwatch have today circulated a callout for fitwatchers to come to the Camp. I quote:

“please forward x

Celebrate Fitwatch’s 1st Birthday at Climate Camp

This year’s Climate Camp will also celebrate Fitwatch’s first outing to a major protest. Since then we have gone from strength to strength.
Use Fitwatch tactics all week, and join us to celebrate our anniversary on the day of mass action (9th August). Together we can render the FIT ineffective, and you too can experience the pleasure of forcing a cameraman to retreat.

During the year, we have received criticism on our blog for being “professional protesters”. However, we agree. We take protest seriously. We want to be effective, and to do this we need reclaim our anonymity.
Fitwatch - bring the professional back into protesting!”

Needless to say, this heightened cop activity right from the off won’t deter me from my plans, as I suspect goes for a lot of other folk as well.

So there you have it. Blogging silence from me for at least a week or so (who was that who just said “Phew, thank heaven for that”?).

Oh, almost forgot to mention… the Climate Camp website’s here!

I really should have made some mention here of the recent Carnival Against the Arms Trade last week, but I ran out of time. At least I managed to get something posted to TawNews though…

“Recently smashEDO have been holding “noise demonstrations” outside EDO’s site at Home Farm Road in Brighton every Wednesday afternoon.
But this past Wednesday (4th June) the regular local effort was supplemented by something much larger… the Carnival Against the Arms Trade…

With everyone in high spirits and numbers reaching an estimated 600+, folk having turned up for the event from all over the country and being joined by Critical Mass cyclists, the Carnival set off up the Lewes Road toward EDO’s offices…

…people adopting the fitwatch approach seemed to be all over the place, photographing the cops photographing the Carnival, waving flags in front of the cameras of FIT and local “intelligence-gatherers”, and generally giving the snoop cops a bit of a hard time…

And how many times do we need to witness a largely peaceful (although perhaps noisy) demonstration quickly turn into something potentially quite unpleasant by the provocative over-reactions of the cops?”

Read the full article here.

And we really want to trust the Government to safely and securely implement/maintain a National ID Card scheme?…

Benefit data discs held for year - Yahoo News UK
The Conservatives have branded a report that an ex-contractor at the DWP had two discs with thousands of benefit claimants details for more than a year “disturbing”.
publicitéThe News of the World reports that two discs were found at the home of a former contractor to the Department for Work and Pensions.

The worker discovered that she had inadvertently forgotten to return the discs when her work with the DWP finished - and expressed her surprise that no one had checked that she had done so.

The two new missing discs reveal what kind of benefits the people receive. The data on the discs can be accessed by any standard computer and is not encrypted or protected by a password.

The blunder comes days after the Government was forced to admit it had lost the personal details of more than 25 million people in the post.

That crisis was sparked when a junior official at HM Revenue & Customs official in Tyne and Wear sent two unencrypted CDs containing details of child benefit claimants by courier to the National Audit office in London. The discs were not recorded or registered.

Shadow work and pensions secretary Chris Grayling said of the latest blunder: “This is an exceptionally disturbing new development involving highly sensitive personal information.

“The fact that it hasnt been copy protected is further evidence of a cavalier attitude towards data protection in Government departments. Ministers need to explain urgently how they are going to put things right.”

On Saturday it emerged confidential information on millions of investors is regularly being sent through the post to HM Revenue and Customs without proper security.

Investment managers in the City are required to mail personal data on their clients to HMRC on unencrypted computer discs despite the recent outcry.

Open letter, due to safety issues involved with delivering letters to New Scotland Yard (ie henchmen in uniforms with guns arresting peaceful people armed with… …letters!).www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/07/345451.html

On behalf of Mr Brian W Haw, Parliament Square Peace Campaign, to commissioner:-
Today, 5th October 2007, I hereby serve upon you a copy of an application made under section 59(2) Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, at Southwark Crown Court relating to Mr Brian Haw & Co.’s property stolen by you/your henchmen on 23rd May 2006.

I remind you that you are now required, within 7 days, to (a) notify Mr Haw and the Court officer whether you are making representations and appearing at the hearing; and (b) if you wish to make representations, a WRITTEN (I understand you have problems with reducing things to writing - ie authorisations under SOCPA) statement setting out such representations.

Steven Jago,
for and on behalf of Mr Brian W Haw.

To public:

Brian Haw & Co. would like to re-assure members of the public that protest around Parliament is in fact - not banned - yet - and visitors to the 24/7 “As Long As It Takes” Parliament Square Peace Campaign this Monday, 8th October 2007 are very welcome to see the new banner display before the old one is restored to its former home.

Both Brian and the Burmese protests are continuing on Monday as normal, so you can see both displays while visiting. You will of course also be able to see Mayor ken livingstone’s illegal barriers in Parliament Square - an attempt to severely curtail peaceful campaigning.

SteveJ
e-mail: stevej_appalled(at)yahoo.co.uk
Homepage: www.parliament-square.org

As published on Indymedia

I have to confess, its not entirely unknown for me to be somewhat scathing of the cops.
Not generally when they’re performing their normal “bobby-type” duties you understand (although even then I’ve had a few run-ins with the traffic cops from time to time) but moreso when they’re peforming tasks that could be perceived as serving a political agenda. Like providing protection for war criminals (a la the G8 summit) or for arms dealers, or snooping on innocent protesters, or suppressing legitimate political dissent.
And I’m not overly impressed with their deceitfulness (sometimes moving over into actual lying), their hypocrisy, their bully-boy tactics, their preconceptions, and their seeming inability to distinguish between hardened criminals and political activists (who generally are fairly law-abiding folk but with a social conscience).

However, I’m not exactly one of those journalist-types that seem to be anti-police regardless of circumstance - almost on principle, sort of thing.
Almost inevitably at any gathering of activists where the cops are likely to be lurking one hears the old refrain “Don’t talk to the cops. Even when they seem to be ok they’ll only try to get information from you”.
Well, let me set the record straight: that’s only a generalisation, and more often than not completely untrue - and I think I’m probably old enough now to recognise fishing when it occurs!

There are few events I’ve attended where at some stage or other I’ve not talked to one or another of the assembled boys in blue, and its not been very often where an attempt’s been made to elicit info from me. Sure, its happened occasionally, and my normal reaction is simply to deflect the probe.
More often than not responses (if I’ve initiated the exchange) are formal bordering on dismissive (yeah, I can see in their eyes that they think I’m scum!), but just occasionally I’ve had really good conversations. Ok, not very often, but it does happen.

You can put some sort of rationale to this (if you want) along the lines of trying to touch their humanity, or demonstrating to them that those engaged in, or seeking to report fairly on, protests are not just a bunch of wasters and scumbags, or whatever.
But the truth is simply that I’m the sort of person who prefers to be on good terms with folk unless they give me cause not to be. And that applies almost regardless of who they are (I’d probably draw the line at Tony Blair, George Bush et al, but hey, none of us are perfect!).
Sure, I can shout abuse with the best of them if occasion demands it, and I’ve a few sharp responses for those that try to talk down to me, but generally I find it preferable not to deliberately alienate people, providing I don’t have to compromise the things in which I believe.

So, having now probably laid the groundwork for arguments with some of the more die-hard activists, I can proceed with the tale.

One of the roles I found myself fulfilling at this year’s Climate Camp was that of photographer - in various capacities. Camp Photographer, photographer for the FitWatch people, and journalist-type person (see this post).
Well, certainly in the last two of those capacities I found myself almost literally rubbing shoulders periodically with the activists’ dreaded foe.
A few exchanges and conversations occurred, some of which were ok, others leaving me muttering “bastard” and similar expressions.

But one stands out head and shoulders above the rest. I’m convinced that I’ve finally met a copper who’s actually a real human being!

Chief Inspector Pendry of (would you believe it) the Metropolitan Police!!!

The first encounter was at second-hand and occurred in the village of Harmondsworth where the Kids Block march had come to a temporary halt, the cops wanting to go one way, the marchers another. So there was a rather noisy assembly at the crossroads leading into the village, the locals siding with the protesters and the cops determined not to give way.
But, although noisy and a few “pleasantries” tossed from either side, there was no real trouble.

So it was with complete astonishment that suddenly, out of the blue, a squad of riot cops in full gear comes trotting toward the crowd.
Unfortunately a mate and I were positioned between the protesters and the oncoming intimidators and my one thought was “Shit, we’re in trouble now”, rapidly followed by swivelling head to see if I could spot a hole to crawl into.
Didn’t stop me from firing off a few photos though and whilst so engaged some guy with a PA system (it may even have been the Rinky-Dink crew) drew everyone’s attention to what was happening.
Moments later, after milling around like lost sheep, the squad simply turned tail and disappeared from whence they came.
Then my mate reports to me that he’d overheard some senior cop (my Chief Inspector Pendry as I later learned) shouting the classic phrase “What the f*** are they doing here upsetting my protesters?” (or words to that effect!).

I found the notion that she’d sort of adopted the marchers as “her protesters” curiously delightful, reinforced by the sheer relief at seeing the nasties scurry away tails between legs. In fact, something about their entire behaviour reminded me a lot of the Keystone Kops.

The dilemma of which way the march should go was shortly thereafter settled to the relative satisfaction of all (some sort of compromise having been worked out) and everyone peacefully wandered down to the village green for a brief stop and a mingling with the locals.

I did hear tell that some of the cops just couldn’t shed their control mentality though, and sought to prevent access to the local hostelries. But apparently a landlord of one of the pubs made plain his dismay at losing out on such wonderful potential trade, and the cops moved away.
Not that my mate and I were too bothered; we’d already snuck in for our refreshments.

Eventually the assembly moved off, back up to the crossroads in resumption of the march to BAA.

At some stage along the route my mate and I, being way out in front with other media people, found ourselves talking with this police-type person mainly to find out what the current route was, and whether we were actually going in the right direction.
Turns out this is none other than the admirable Chief Inspector.

Well, the brief exchange turned into a conversation that, on and off, lasted virtually the rest of the march.
Not once did she try pumping us for information. Not once did she utter a single derogatory remark about the protesters, or the Camp itself. Indeed at one point she confessed to being somewhat impressed by the hardiness of the Campers spending a week-long sojourn in a field in not the best of weather.

She even shared with us where along the route we’d find somewhere for a quick cup of coffee and a toilet! (Vital things to know when you’re engaged in this sort of activity.)

The only explanation we could come up with to explain this completely bizarre behaviour was that she didn’t actually realise we were “embedded media” so to speak.
But now I doubt even that. For when we saw her again the following day her attitude toward us was exactly the same, yet its inconceivable that by then she hadn’t discovered, or been informed, of who we were.

Ok, the whole thing may just have been a huge con intended to lull us into changing our perception of the cops. But somehow I think not. She came across to both my mate and I as being perfectly genuine (and I think we’ve both probably had enough encouters to distinguish between false sincerity and the real thing). Yet even if we were both taken in, she’s gotta score big-time in terms of PR for the Met.
Perhaps if there were a few more like her events such as Climate Camp wouldn’t be so stressful for either side.

Chief Inspector Pendry… you’re worthy of respect!

“C’mon lads, let’s get ‘em!”

” ‘ang on a minute, someone don’t look too pleased”

“Oops… s’pose we’d best go back the way we came”

Watch the video clip first!…

UK Muslim 7/7 London Bombings survey 06.04.2007 - FAIR USE
Propaganda piece from UK news channel about the 7/7 London bombings.

embedded by Embedded Video

Google Direct London Bombings Survey

I susoect the results of the poll reported in the clip in fact understate the case. It may well be that a significant number of those surveyed were unwilling to state their true views for fear of reprisals or whatever.

I have worked closely with Muslims for over 16 years now and can state quite categorically that the vast majority of those with whom I work and share friendship simply don’t accept the official version of 7/7. And these are not terrorists, or extremists, or fundamentalists… simply ordinary folk just trying to live their lives  and provide for their families without interference.

And I, as a non-Muslim, find mysef agreeing with them. Far too many anomalies about the entire 7/7 episode to warrant unquestioning acceptance of the official version.

And when this is put in context of the deceptions that were practised on the British public by the government and the media in the lead-up to the Iraq war, is it any wonder that whatever explanations they produce will lack credibility?

Far too many transgressions against human rights, freedoms, morality - even just common decency - are committed in the name of “National Security” and rationalised by resorting to the argument “The end justifies the means”.

However there’s a major flaw, both logically and morally, with that argument.
I had a rant about it some years ago when I was active in the anti-Iraq war movement, and the essence of what I said then still holds good today…

“Y’see, that’s the fallacy with the ‘end justifies the means’ argument – we can never truly know what the real end will be, or even when…
…’The end justifies the means’ can only ever work if we extract a slice of time and arbitrarily (i.e., to suit our own purposes – in other words, whatever’s convenient) determine ‘this particular point is the beginning’ and ‘this other particular point is the end’.”

(www.tiltingatwindmills.org.uk/imo/niggles.htm)

The Secret Government: The Constitution in Crisis, by Bill Moyers

This is the full length 90 min. version of Bill Moyer’s 1987 scathing critique of the criminal subterfuge carried out by the Executive  … all » Branch of the United States Government to carry out operations which are clearly contrary to the wishes and values of the American people. The ability to exercise this power with impunity is facilitated by the National Security Act of 1947. The thrust of the exposé is the Iran-Contra arms and drug-running operations which flooded the streets of our nation with crack cocaine. The significance of the documentary is probably greater today in 2007 than it was when it was made. We now have a situation in which these same forces have committed the most egregious terrorist attack on US soil and have declared a fraudulent so-called “War on Terror”. The ruling regime in the US who have conducted the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, are now banging the war drum against Iran. We have the PATRIOT act which has stripped us of many of our basic civil rights justified by the terror of 9/11 which is their own doing.

embedded by Embedded Video

Google Direct The Secret Goverment

Ruby Ridge Leader Visits New Hampshire

Alex Jones Radio: Randy Weaver Joins Ed and Elaine Brown (.mp3 audio)

ABC Covers Ed and Elaine Brown’s Press Conference
Russell Goldman
Monday June 18, 2007
Comment: Local news channel WMUR has a report on the conference. As we expected they jumped on the fact that Ed Brown initially waited for the Alex Jones show to comeback from break before beginning the conference, stating “Ed Brown held a phone conversation simultaneously”. A portion of the Conference can be viewed at this local ABC website. We will post a YouTube of the full conference as soon as it becomes available.Calling the federal agents surrounding his fortified compound “guns for hire,” a New Hampshire man convicted of tax evasion vowed today that he and his wife would fight U.S. marshals to the death if they tried to capture them.”Do not under any circumstances make any attempt on this land. We will not accept any tomfoolery by any criminal element, be it federal, state or local,” said Ed Brown in a press conference from the stoop of his concrete-clad home in Plainfield, N.H. “We either walk out of here free or we die.”

Brown and his wife, Elaine, were sentenced in absentia in April to serve 63 months in prison for failing to pay more than $1 million in income tax.

The couple, however, insists that there is no law that requires citizens to pay income tax.

“There is no law. We looked and looked,” Brown told the press.

Brown and his supporters, including Randy Weaver, leader of the 1992 standoff with ATF agents at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, told the press that the government has unlawfully tricked people into believing they have to pay income tax, knowing full well that such a law would be unconstitutional.

“We will defend it to the death. This is 1776 all over again. You cannot tax someone’s labor because that is slavery,” Brown said.

Carrying a pistol in his waistband, Brown also insisted that he could not receive a fair trial in a federal court because “the court system falls under freemasonry.”

“There [are] no longer any lawful courts. The Freemasons have taken over our nation. … [Freemasons want] to take over our nation and all nations on the planet,” Brown said.

Weaver, whose son was killed by federal agents and who later received a $100,000 settlement from the government, said he was there to support the Browns.

“I’d rather die on my feet right here than die on my knees under this de facto government,” he said. “Bring it on.”

Despite months of surveillance and reports of agents hiding in the woods of the couple’s 110-acre compound, U.S. marshals said this morning that the Brown’s Plainfield, N.H., home was not surrounded by their officers.

U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier made an effort to starkly contrast the actions of the Marshals with those of the ATF agents who besieged Ruby Ridge in 1992. In addition to Weaver’s son, one federal agent was killed in that incident.

“There is no standoff and the house is not surrounded.” Monier told ABC News.com. “We have no intention of assaulting the house or engaging in a violent confrontation.”

Monier said he believed Weaver would attend the press conference the Browns are hosting this afternoon. He said Weaver and others — some of whom are believed to have brought the couple weapons — have been freely allowed to enter Brown’s property.

“There is no reason to block Weaver. People are free to exercise their First Amendment rights,” Monier said. “We are not setting up roadblocks or surrounding the house.”

In April, Ed and Elaine Brown were sentenced in absentia to 63 months in prison for failing to pay more than $1 million in taxes.

Since failing to appear in court the couple has remained within the concrete-fortified walls of their rural New Hampshire home.

Monier said the Marshals have been communicating with the couple in an effort to get them to turn themselves over the federal authorities without having to resort to the use of force.

“We know they have weapons and we do not want to see this escalate,” he said.

Last week agents cut off the home’s telephone, Internet and power access. Monier said the couple most likely had generators — possibly solar or wind powered — but that eventually the Browns would become uncomfortable enough in their isolation that they would be forced to surrender.

“They probably have generators but those will soon need fuel and need people to fix them. We want to continue to encourage them, and make it uncomfortable enough for them that they’ll give up.”

Brown said he and his wife had enough supplies to wait out the government no matter how long it lasted. He said the couple did not use air conditioning and could chop down trees from firewood.

Last week, Danny Riley a friend of the Browns was arrested near their home by federal agents while walking the couple’s dog.

The Marshals claim they were engaged in routine surveillance of the property, but the Browns believe Riley thwarted a potential raid.

Related News:

C.H.A.N.G.E. Visits Ed and Elaine Brown
Browns Likely Under Attack Again!
FED Informer Infiltrates Brown House
Police Lie, Say Browns Not Under Siege Despite Presence of Six APC’s, Helicopters, Drones and Fully Armed Special Ops Teams
Federal Assault on Brown Home Was Aborted
Marshals Fired Rounds At Ed Brown’s Dog Walker Before Planned Siege
Brown Says Agents Came to Kill Him
Marshals Say No Raid Planned on Brown Home
Utilities Cut Off to Brown Home
Ed Brown Has A Lot of Friends
Brown Felt Federal Raid Was Imminent
Lessons of Waco, Ruby Ridge Applied At Plainfield
Ed Brown Says Feds Have No Jurisdiction in New Hampshire
Recent Theft of Elaine Brown’s Business Place Underway
Naive To Believe Ed Brown Events Were Not Preparation For Future Siege
Ed Brown: Incident Was “Test” To See What Response Would Be
Lawman: Brown Siege May Be Psy Op
Raw Story Feature On Prison Planet Coverage Of Ed Brown Siege Incident
Report: An AP photographer who was flying in a plane over Brown’s property today was ordered out of the airspace
US Marshalls Serve Warrant to Seize Brown’s Dental Office
AUDIO: 9:08 a.m. Associated Press interview today with Ed Brown
Report: Authorities serving warrant, don’t intend confrontation
FLASHBACK: Marshal: No plans for armed standoff
Yahoo Video On Ed Brown Situation
Police assemble by Browns’ home
VIDEO news report from the scene
SWAT teams, armored vehicle seen near Brown compound

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direct 

It would be a legitimate question to ask why a UK resident such as myself would engage with the issue of Ed and Elaine Brown.
After all, they don’t live in the UK; they’re not people normally in the public eye; their situation is not relevant to UK affairs.

I cannot comment upon the legal niceties of the Browns’ situation - my knowledge of U.S. law and its Constitution is inadequate.
But (in my understanding) what we have here is an accusation of failure to pay certain taxes, and a request to see the specific legal requirements for paying said taxes. The request is unfulfilled and so the payment is withheld.

It is a matter of public record that the Browns are fully prepared to pay such taxes, today, now, if they can simply be shown the law that requires them to so do.

Forget the legal niceties. So far, to me, it seems fairly clear cut.

So why, I ask myself, hasn’t the appropriate “law” been shown to them? And why, rather than showing them the appropriate law, is it seen fit to despatch multiple armed servants of the federal administration?

Presumably the relevant “law” is encoded in document form - so how many people does it take to deliver a document? Or, even more simply, does the United States of America not have a postal service?

The Browns argue quite persuasively that no such legal requirement exists.
From the albeit cursory researches that I have performed it would appear that the United States federal administration cannot legally (i.e., in conformity with the U.S. Constitution) levy an “unapportioned income tax”.

I’ve watched videos of interviews with the Browns. I cannot say I entirely agree with them on everything, but that’s completely beside the point.
What does impress me is their determination not to compromise on what is really a very fundamental principle - how can any of us observe the Rule of Law if we don’t know what the law is, and if those claiming to invoke such a law cannot “produce the proof” as it were?

A little personal history here: for most of my life (and I am now in my middle years) I have tended to be something of a rebel. Going against the system; challenging authority; questioning “givens”. But, for the most part, this has been done in little ways, in small things. And indeed that was all that was necessary, for I’ve lived in a society where the demands have not been too onerous, where the encroachments upon my personal freedoms and privacy have not been overly aggressive.
So my response has been proportionate.
But times are changing; here in the UK the concept of the “State” has become much more prevalent and its interference (or potential for interference) in my personal life much more noticeable. And so my “activism” has escalated accordingly - adhering to the principle of “proportionate response”.

“Proportionate response” is something I can relate to, and understand. But in the Browns’ case what I see (according to all the reports I’ve read) is an entirely DISPROPORTIONATE response on the part of the federal  administration.
That the Browns should be prepared to meet that accordingly elevates them to my mind, and regardless of any other issue, to the status of heroes. Unqualified. Unreservedly. Heroes!

For they’re prepared to confront without compromise the full weight of a far superior force without flinching. I cannot be anything other than inspired by their courage and fortitude.

However, my admiration for the Browns does not blind me to the obscenity of what is occurring.
Here we have a not-so-young couple being laid seige to by a veritable army of mindless thugs (for such they must be, else they would begin to question their own orders and the morality of what they’re about) equipped with all manner of weaponry and technology. OVER A TAX ISSUE!!!

If the situation weren’t so dire I would find it utterly unbelievable. Surely such a thing simply cannot occur in a civilised society.

And here we have the crux of the matter. For it has become clear to me (from its international “adventures” and relations) that the United States of America under the Bush regime has become a rogue entity, intent upon world domination and totally disregarding any form of Rule of Law and indeed any form of morality.
That this rogue entity should now bring its modus operandi to bear upon its own citizens and residents should come as no surprise, and the Browns affair is simply one more in a progression of increasingly fascist manifestations.

Nor can I see an easy or peaceful resolution to the matter. The federal administration cannot back down (indeed, dare not back down) for to do so would be to send a signal to all “genuine” criminals that the “State” can be successfuly challenged providing one has sufficient determination. Such a course would simply open the floodgates to all manner of serious organised crime.
Neither can the federal administration reverse the findings so far and declare the Browns innocent of wrongdoing. For to do so would be to open up an entirely different set of floodgates - an unmistakeable signal to all U.S. residents to challenge and defy this fictitious law that supposedly requires them to surrender a portion of their hard-earned income to the State.
(Imagine the repercussions: not only would vast numbers of people suddenly stop paying this illegal tax - theft in other words - but would also have a very strong case to demand recompense for all past payments levied!)
Nor can the federal administration simply “pardon” the Browns. That would be tantamount to saying “Ok, you’re guilty, but we’re gonna let you off”. If my asessment of the Browns is anything approaching the reality I cannot imagine them accepting such a situation for they would thereby implicity be acknowledging their guilt.

On the Browns’ side, from everything I’ve seen so far I simply cannot see them backing down. The courage it must have taken to reach this point is unimaginable. Just in doing so they’ve proved their mettle.

A rock and a hard place indeed. And in that I’m fearful - for this assessment can only lead to one, bloody, conclusion.

And so the real question is, what of the American people? Are they prepared to stand by and see their rogue government massacre yet more innocent people (for surely the Browns’ guilt has not been proven by virtue of the fact that the relevant law has still not been shown)?
Or are they, finally, going to decide that this is the time to take a stand?

I am desperately concerned about the outcome of this situation. A concern that is deepened by virtue of the fact that NONE of the mainstream media appear in the least interested in covering this situation - a situation that may have started as a relatively insignificant legal wrangle but has now escalated into something highlighting the fundamental flaw at the very heart of not just the American but most Western “governments” - that the people have become subservient to the “State”.

And here is my secondary reason for being engaged with this issue - my very great fear (substantiated by our own minority-mandated government’s cretinous support of the Bush regine over the past few years) that what’s occurring in America now may well be the precursor to what will become standard practise in Britain in just a few years’ time.

So the Browns’ situation should, and has, become an affair that engages the interests of ordinary folk worldwide, for it is yet another manifestation of the ubiquitous battle between the individual and the State.

Individuals are REAL. The State is an artificial construct. Whose side are you on?