LISTEN NOW… Living in the modern world is hard – there’s more information than ever at everyone’s fingertips, but public discourse isn’t getting more enlightened. How can people with the same information come to such radically different conclusions? Join your hosts to think about the way people think on this week’s Told You So! LISTEN NOW…
This week on Manch Talk, it’s ‘Festivus for the Rest of Us’! Or maybe, the ‘Best of Us’?!? In today’s episode, we do a little “Airing of Grievances.” Watch to see with whom we “have a lot of problems with you people!” Can you guess who made the list?
LISTEN NOW… New revelations from the Washington Post have blown the lid off almost two decades and two administrations lying about the war in Afghanistan. Dive into the damning details with your hosts on this week’s Told You So! LISTEN NOW…
What am I doing? Watch the video to find out! Also in this episode: Government? There’s an app for that!
I was delighted to join Peter R. Quinones of The Libertarian Institute on his podcast, Free Man Beyond the Wall, to pimp the great Granite State, and convince more people to move to the Free State of New Hampshire. We talk about how NH consistently ranks best for quality of living, its low taxes environment (no sales or personal income tax), how NH’s business tax rate is declining quarterly, how business-friendly the state generally is, and how Granite Staters recently worked together across the aisle to abolish the death penalty. Take a listen now…
LISTEN NOW… With the advent of the year’s first major snowstorm, we’re taking a break from politics to discuss how to survive and thrive during New Hampshire’s long, cold winters. From recipes and fitness tips to metaphysical speculation, your hosts have some thoughts. Find out what they are on this week’s Told You So! LISTEN NOW…
[PS: This episode could also be called, OMFG, what did I commit to learning to do? Whyyyyyy??? LOL]
Wondering what’s cooking in Hong Kong? Watch the documentary “Rebellion: On the Front Lines of Hong Kong’s Uprising,” available on Amazon. Also check out Netflix’s “Joshua: Teenager vs. Superpower,” if you want to feel David vs. Goliath inspired about what your own human action could accomplish if you just got out there and tried.
“Rebellion” covers what began as spontaneous protests against an extradition law to allow suspects to be deported to mainland China, but has now blossomed into a full-blown popular uprising. Why now? Because as the protestors themselves state, they understand they have only one shot, one chance to resist, otherwise Hong Kong will be subsumed by the Chinese Communist Party, and despite what many misinformed Americans think, Hong Kongers know there ain’t no party in the Communist Party.
Just ask this guy, who was recently brought in for questioning by Chinese authorities, placed in some kind of weirdo jail chair, and questioned because of something he posted in a private chat group. Says Canadian Erza Levant:
“China spies on social media conversations. Then they bring dissidents in for a real-life chat. I’d say we’re AT LEAST five years away from that over here, so no worries.”
Erza Levant’s Tweet
In “Rebellion,” police and hired thugs, literally the Triad–funny how police worldwide always seem to know where to find helpful criminals, almost like, hmm, never mind–start to escalate the violence, eventually maiming and blinding a lady by shooting her in the eye. This shocks Hong Kongers, who, generally speaking, are a peaceful and polite lot, and brings more ordinary people to the streets in protest against police brutality on top of the demands for political reforms.
The most poignant moment for me is when the movie cuts to street graffiti that simply says (translated):
You have taught us peaceful protest is not enough…
Street Art
As a police accountability activist, I have to wonder: When American law enforcement watch the events unfolding in Hong Kong, or watch a documentary like Rebellion, who do they root for? The young, idealistic freedom fighters hoping to keep their quasi-independence from the murderous Commie Motherland, or do American cops now root for “law and order” so hard that they support the vicious, teargassing, bludgeoning police furthering Communist goals and hurting innocent people expressing their right to live free? I’m genuinely curious…
ADDED 12/4/19: Read Pat Buchanan’s take, In Hong Kong, It’s US vs. China Now.
Love learning stuff? Wonder why I think the way I do? Start with these: 7 Documentaries that make you go, “Hmm…”
LISTEN NOW… From surveillance to right to know requests, a lot of important issues are currently in the courts – and not all the news is good. Get the inside scoop with your hosts on this week’s episode of Told You So! LISTEN NOW…
This week, we fill you in on egregious violations of your Right-to-Know by discussing three current cases in front of the NH Supreme Court (read more here), how use of force compares between law enforcement on the streets of America and soldiers in combat zones (the rules of engagement in war zones are stricter! Wut!?!), the City’s police surveillance cameras are coming, and more!
As many of you know, the ACLU-NH has been fighting on my behalf to try to stop permanent police surveillance cameras from being installed in downtown Manchester. Yesterday, I received a court order denying our request for declaratory and injunctive relief, which in plain English means: the City won this round, the police will likely put up their cameras, our rights will continue to be eroded and disregarded with the full authorization of the Courts, and, apparently, we should just accept the stripping away of more and more of our 4th Amendment rights.
The Court said:
It could be argued that the City’s planned use will enable the government to violate the statute. However, simply because footage generated by the cameras could be used to violate the law does not mean the installation or use of the cameras itself violated the law…
The Court cannot find as a matter of law that the planned use of the surveillance cameras will violate RSA 236:130 [Highway Surveillance Prohibited]. Instead, the Court can only speculate that, once the cameras are installed, a government employee reviewing the footage will be capable of engaging in additional conduct that will violate the statute. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgement is denied.
Neal Kurk, et al vs. City of Manchester Docket No. 216-2019-CV-00501
By the Court’s logic, every single current pre-crime statute should be invalidated. You know, the ones where they say you MIGHT do something bad in the future, like crash your car if you’ve been drinking, so we will punish you right NOW, even though you didn’t actually do the thing we’re trying to prevent… Yet. (Or at all.)
The Court also failed to fully consider the legislative history, which you may recall, included this testimony from Dpt. of Safety Assistant Commissioner, Earl Sweeney in 2006, that the law would ban a police department from “setting up cameras to monitor, for example, the downtown business district to detect or deter burglaries, vandalism, drug dealing,” and, “Some police departments set up cameras to monitor downtown businesses… we do not believe that this usage would be allowed in NH without specific legislation at a future time legalizing it.”
Given this, it is safe to say we should no longer rely on the truthfulness of testimony given by government agents during the legislative process. Along the same vein, we should also not trust the MPD’s contention that they will not use facial recognition software or license plate scanners. I am willing to bet any comers they will secretly start using this technology in the future, and if the cameras go up, I encourage anyone who is in a vehicle and issued a citation or arrested in the vicinity of the cameras on Elm Street, to contact me.
While this case revolved around a narrow point of law relating to a specific statute, 82% of Granite Staters voted last year to increase our privacy rights, which tells me this matter isn’t over by a long shot.
Right of Privacy: An individual’s right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent.
Article 2-b, New Hampshire Constitution, December 5, 2018
I’ll conclude with the following: If you believe government can solve problems by restricting more and more of our rights and making us less free in the name of “security,” why do all stories set in the future revolve around people fighting their dystopian overlords? If the future is so bright in this Brave New World, where are the depictions of their promised land? Where is this awesome future society where, by “giving up liberty for security,” things turn out to be oh-so great for us plebs?
I’ve said it before and I will say it again: When you watch futuristic movies, who are you rooting for? In the Matrix, are you rooting for Neo or Agent Smith? In the Hunger Games, Team Katniss, or District 1 of the Capitol? Because, right now, if you aren’t on my side, you are rooting for tyranny, and it is NOT going to end well. Free people move freely. Free people certainly move freely without being surveilled by a group of people who claim to work for us while also keeping a secret list of their worst people from us.
Want to learn more? Read the backstory here, here, here, and here. Listen to my podcasts on this topic, Living with Lockdowns, Big Brother is Watching, and You Don’t Need to See This List of Bad Cops, Citizen.