"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised 'for the good of its victims' may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." --C. S. Lewis (1898-1963)

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" -Patrick Henry

Following the 911 "attack", "Spook Central" (aka Georgetown U. School of law) drafted "Model Emergency Powers Legislation" that was rubber stamped by the Centers for Disease Control, then handed to the National Assn of State Governors with instructions to each of the 50 states that they must ram it through the state legislatures pronto, ostensibly to "protect us all" from "terrorism"; even though there have been no more attacks on US or Canadian soil since, and "Al-Qaeda" [largely a creation of the CIA to fight Soviet imperialism], are penniless and in shambles.

These so-called "laws"  [which are, in reality, mere legislative regulations] are COMING FROM THE UNITED NATIONS via the "ISO" The International Standards Organization, which is pushing it in over 100 nations [last count] world wide, to standardize "drivers licences" and "universal identity cards" around the planet, with the intent that they will ALL have biometric identifiers....

The "Model Emergency Powers Act" [as it is called in the US], is legislation that will be used to force you to put your thumb print and other biometric based id onto your drivers license [Now you know why the courts want to ensure 'drivers licenses' are mandatory].

The legislation will confer dictatorial powers onto your representative State or Provincial Governor, including the right to force you to be vaccinated. It criminalizes refusal to be vaccinated and can, in the US, put your state under martial law with the National Guard in control.

In Canada, these types of measures will be done via the new "Anti-terrorist" Act, which is still being amended as you read this, and is the responsibility of the BRAND NEW MINISTRY known as the "Public Safety" Ministry and is part of the new whopping EIGHT BILLION ( and growing) approved for enforcing the new legislation over its five year mandate.

[Police chiefs want public to pay surveillance surcharge.] <LINK

The minister responsible for overseeing these various projects is none other that former "Justice" Minister Anne McLellan, who once commented that "Canadians should not think that any of their rights are absolute".

 

Biotech chips are designed to be injected into the hand or forehead for retina and/or fingerprint cross-reference..... The technology is relatively new, but demand and acceptance of this new tech is rapidly on the rise, with some people actually volunteering to receive these tracking devices already.

Soon they will be a requirement of "law".... [See link below]

verichip.html

 

Is our government trying to find the perfect "fear factor" virus to bring in their new legislation? [Click link]

McLellan's Damage Control

McLellan and Federal Government selling out our Liberties with fear mongering and lies....

 

Canadian Sheeple ready for Tagging by Dictator.
       
        80 per cent would back national ID cards. Canadians willing to be fingerprinted, say terrorist threats outweigh freedoms.

         OTTAWA -- Four out of five Canadians are willing to provide their fingerprints for a new permanent security card that would be carried at all times and shown to police on request, a Globe and Mail/CTV/Ipsos-Reid poll indicates.

        The poll suggests that most Canadians are willing to surrender some crucial individual rights in exchange for strengthened police powers in the fight against terrorism. Contrary to many continental European countries, Canada has long resisted a universal identity card -- especially one containing such personal information as its owner's fingerprints.

        Britain, which abandoned ID cards after the Second World War, is already thinking of reintroducing them in a bid to toughen up security after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.

        Even though Canada is known for limiting police powers, 59 per cent of respondents to the poll said they would give police the extraordinary power to "randomly stop and search" either themselves or their vehicle.

        A small majority of respondents (53 per cent) also said that law-enforcement officials should be given the power to detain suspected terrorists indefinitely without specific charges.

        Over all, 58 per cent of Canadians said that terrorism threats outweigh the protection of their individual rights and freedoms and the due process of law.

        Canadians, however, rejected measures that would directly affect their privacy. A clear majority of respondents said they do not want the police to tap their phones at will or to snoop through their mail and their credit-card bills without a warrant.

        The poll comes as the federal government is putting the finishing touches on an antiterrorism bill that will eat away at some of the country's  individual freedoms.

        For example, federal sources say the government is thinking of allowing longer detention periods for suspected terrorists before charges are laid. The current limit is 24 hours, but many of Canada's allies allow more time in the fight against terrorism.

        The federal government is also likely to introduce a permanent list of outlawed terrorist groups. Civil libertarians have said the list would bring back memories of McCarthyism and raise fears that legitimate groups could be unjustly named as terrorist fronts by spy agencies.

        In addition, the government is moving a bill through Parliament that will give customs authorities the right to open, without a warrant, any large piece of mail leaving the country.

        Some members of the Chrétien government now say they believe that the Supreme Court will change the way it interprets a key section of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

        They believe the Supreme Court will broaden the "reasonable limits" that can be imposed on individual freedoms.

        Justice Minister Anne McLellan has recently said that the "balance" between individual rights and collective security shifted after the attacks.

        The poll, which is based on a random sample of 1,000 respondents, has a margin of error of 3.1 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

        John Wright of Ipsos-Reid said it highlights the fact that Canadians cherish their privacy, but that they are also willing to offer better resources and tools to police.

        "It's signalling not necessarily intrusion, but necessarily
security," he said.

        David Paciocco, a professor of law at the University of Ottawa, was upset at the willingness of Canadians to allow random police searches and indefinite detention for suspected terrorists.

        "Once these powers are given to authorities, they cannot be controlled," he said. "The public tends not to understand the importance of civil liberties until they need them."

        One of the biggest regional differences in the poll came when respondents were asked whether it would be necessary to give up some civil liberties to wage the fight on terrorism.

        In Quebec, 62 per cent said their liberties would not be sacrificed willingly; but everywhere else, a majority of respondents said they would give up some of their liberties.

        Both Mr. Wright and Prof. Paciocco said Canadians tend to believe that increased police powers will only have an effect on the bad guys.

        "This is about 'the Them' and not 'the Me,' " Mr. Wright said. "Yah, suspend the rights and haul those people off who are 'the Them,' but when it comes to 'the Me,' not a chance."

        Prof. Paciocco added: "We're quite happy to impose these measures on others, but I think Canadians would be howling if the police were stopping all of us on the street, asking us for our fingerprinted identity card."


  Our true north strong and free?
  1,000 Canadians were asked for their input regarding the following statements:

  I would now like to read you a list of initiatives which could be applied to all Canadians - not just newly-arrived immigrants or those awaiting citizenship -and I would like you to tell me whether you would support or oppose being personally subjected to these actions.

    a.. Government and law enforcement officials get power to detain individuals who may be suspected of being involved in terrorist/suspicious activities and detain them indefinitely.

    Support - 53%

    Oppose - 46%


    b.. Allowing intelligence and law enforcement agents to monitor your personal private telephone conversations and e-mail without your knowledge.

    Support - 29%

    Oppose - 71%


    c.. Allowing police and intelligence officials to intercept your mail and read it without first gaining your permission.

    Support - 26%

    Oppose - 74%


    d.. You would submit yourself to providing fingerprints for a national identity card that would be carried on your person at all times to show police or security officials on request.

    Support - 80%

    Oppose - 19%


    e.. Allowing officials to monitor your personal credit card purchases and other financial transactions without you being told.

    Support - 39%

    Oppose - 61%


    f.. Suspend current provisions that police must have a reasonable suspicion that you may have committed an offence so that they can randomly stop and search either you or your vehicle.

    Support - 59%

    Oppose - 40%


    g.. Which of the following statements is closer to your personal point of view?
 

    Charter and due process of law should be respected/Do not give police the security tools they want - 38%

    Terrorism threats outweigh protection of individuals' rights and due process of law/Give police the security tools they need - 58%


    h.. In order to curb terrorism in this country, do you think it will be necessary for you to give up some of your civil liberties, that are currently protected in law, or not?

    Yes, necessary - 52%

    No, not necessary - 46%

    Source: Ipsos-Reid   Daniel Leblanc, Globe And Mail, Toronto
 

Ron Paul | March 14 2006

April 15 is once again approaching and with it the necessity of filling out your tax return. It is a good time to reflect on the taxes you do pay-and especially on the taxes you may soon be forced to pay.

Throughout the year you paid federal taxes through withholding, including Social Security payroll taxes. You also paid state income taxes, unless you' re fortunate enough to live in Texas or another state without an income tax.

You paid local property taxes. You paid local sales taxes and numerous miscellaneous taxes on your vehicles and gasoline and so many other things. Like most people, you probably feel taxed to death by all these layers of taxes.

Well, hold on to your wallets, because the United Nations once again has launched a plan to impose a whole new level of global taxes on us.

The latest UN tax scheme was revealed at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January. At this conference of the world's financial elite, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) unveiled a UN plan to take $7 trillion from developed nations for use by the UN to save the rest of the world from all of its problems.

The United Nations remains determined to rob from wealthy countries and, after taking a big cut for itself, send what's left to the poor countries. Of course, most of this money will go to the very dictators whose reckless policies have impoverished their citizens.

According to the international bureaucrats of the UN, wherever poverty exists in the rest of the world it is always our fault. According to them, our prosperity comes not from hard work, legal protection of property rights and our capitalist system, but rather because we exploit the poor of the Third World. Somehow, it's always our fault.

Where will the $7 trillion to fund the latest UN scheme come from? Much of it is to come from a UN-imposed fine on countries that in the UN's judgment are polluting too much. This attack on productivity will slow our economy and lead to a loss of jobs in the United States.

The UN global tax plan also resurrects the long-held dream of the "Tobin Tax," and doubles the targeted income from such a tax to a whopping $3 trillion.

The "Tobin tax," named after the Yale professor who proposed it, would be imposed on all worldwide currency transactions. Such a tax could prove quite lucrative for the UN, given the vast amount of currency that trades hands at certain times.

It also might be a politically acceptable starting point, because most average people do not engage in cross-border currency transactions. A dangerous precedent would be set, however: the idea that the UN possesses legitimate taxing authority to fund its operations.

Since I was elected to Congress I have been fighting continuously against these UN efforts to pick your pocket. In the 109th Congress I successfully amended the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of 2005 to prohibit any of the funds in the act from being used by the UN to develop or publicize any proposal concerning taxation or fees on any United States person to raise revenue for the UN or any of its specialized or affiliated agencies.

I also introduced H.R. 1017 in the current Congress, which would permanently prohibit United States contributions to the United Nations if that organization develops, implements or publicizes any proposal to tax Americans.

Of course, my preference is that the United States end its participation in the corrupt UN entirely, and I introduce H.R. 1146 in every Congress to do just that.

But until my colleagues are willing to take this important step, I will continue to offer measures like my amendment last year to help protect your hard-earned money from the greedy hands of the globalist United Nations.