Is it practical to use P2P technology / torrents? So there's no incentive for JBT's to confiscate your servers? I'm not up on technology, but P2P seems to be the only defense against cover-ups.
Luv... could we take the marijuana debate to the FREEDOM LIVING forum as we try to see that ADAM gets out on bail and hires a good attorney?
You said that people, while high, aren't good for anything.
How about instead of us trying to give all our examples to disprove your statement, you actually provide some well-founded evidence for your claim.
Wow. I'm steamed. I just read that complaint. What a PUSSY that fed is. Waaa he grabbed my arm. So let's charge him with a felony that could send him to jail for 10 years. Why don't they just fucking rename it contempt of cop and get it over with. Holy shit I'm pissed.
I haven't any idea what you are talking about. A game system? Not techy, sorry.
I don't think we'd have anything anyone else didn't have. We will just be collecting them in one place for organized review.
I can answer that. You see, potheads are notoriously lazy and irresponsible. If they grant bail, Adam might get himself so high while sitting on his couch at home that he forgets to show up for his next court date.
And he'll be high as a kite. So you see, he's a flight risk.
MLK was asking for it too I suppose.
Do you live in a small town? Because I do, and I can tell you officers enforce just as many unconstitutional laws here and haven't a clue what the Constitution is about. It's not even debatable that virtually all police enforce unconstitutional laws. The system operates this way all over the country, not just in urban areas. They're there to generate revenue, and believe me, every small town needs revenue. Most kids who want to be police want to be police because of the propaganda. I thought it was cool once, but I grew out of it. The only people who take that kind of job now, even if they are good-intentioned, end up enforcing unconstitional laws. You seem to think that good intentions excuses evil behavior, and with that I vehemently disagree.
What reason? Did the people who banned Kokesh publish their reasons, so the rest of us can evaluate them for ourselves?
From a facebook post:
''If you are trying to call to inquire about Adam's status at the Federal facility in Pennsylvania - you need to have his inmate ID number, or you will wait on hold forever, and then they will not talk to you. The number is: 215-521-4000 (wait a few seconds, then press 0). They will ask for his inmate ID, which is 69371-066. If you don't have that number, they will refer you to the WRONG website to obtain it. It is a stalling mechanism.''
Many in the libertarian movement have caustically criticized Kokesh for his brazenness. Granted, a group of armed libertarians meeting up with DC police squads could be very dangerous, despite promises to remain peaceful. But most of the criticism I’ve seen hurled at Kokesh seems more about criticizing civil disobedience and activism in general, concerned it will reflect poorly on their deferential image. Too many want to regulate the behavior of libertarians and keep things strictly to suits, ties, academic seminars, and writing pedantic policy papers barely anyone will read – as if that’s the only acceptable or productive way to push libertarian ideas.
...You can also see from the several videos taken at the scene that Kokesh did not resist arrest, and instead put his hands up and stood straight while several officers man-handled him.
According to freeadam.net Kokesh is being charged with grabbing an officers arm after being pushed – a “felony assault.” The video doesn’t show any evidence of that allegation, but either way, the arrest is an affront to liberty.
As Anthony Gregory writes today, “Resisting arrest is a troubling derivative crime, whereby the state can basically push you around, and if you even react naturally (or the state says you did), it can haul you away. Putting aside problems of arrest, jailing, and the state itself, there should be no crime of ‘resisting arrest’ in a semi-free society. Either you committed a violation of someone’s rights or you did not. If you did not, you have a moral right to resist.”
[...] what we have here is a peaceful activist, a non-violent resister, and he’s been thrown in jail not for being harmful to anybody’s person or property, but for being disobedient in the face of unjust laws. The latter is a crime only to those with authoritarian inclinations and a calm respect for the police state.