noworldsystem.com


Americans put in jail for not paying the bills

America’s new debtor prison: Jail time being given to those who owe

Walletpop
July 18, 2010

Debtors prisons were federally abolished in the United States in the 1800’s, yet in certain states, they seem to be making a comeback. Out of Minnesota come disturbing reports of Americans being thrown in jail due to outstanding bills — sometimes for as little as $85. The Star-Tribune of Minneapolis profiles a number of people who say their debts got them jailed, including Joy Uhlmeyer a 57-year-old patient care advocate who was pulled over on her way home from visiting her elderly mother and put in jail for a night for missing a court hearing about unpaid debt.

The Star-Tribune reviewed the state’s court documents and found that arrests like Uhlmeyer’s are up 60% in Minnesota over the past four years. And Minnesota isn’t the only state where this is happening. It’s a turn of events Ed Mierzwinski, consumer program director at advocacy group U.S. Public Interest Research Groups (or PIRG), calls a “very bad situation for consumers.” Mierzwinski attributes the practice to “bottom-feeder debt collectors [who] are very aggressive.”
People who are imprisoned for their debts are technically locked up for contempt of court after failing to appear for a hearing pertaining to their debt. It’s a legal loophole that debt-collection companies are increasingly using. Here’s how it works: First, the collections company files a lawsuit against the debtor, which requires them to appear in court. If the debtor doesn’t show up, the creditor wins a default judgment against them. This allows them to ask the court to schedule another hearing at which the judge can go through the debtor’s assets and determine if actions such as wage garnishments or bank account seizures can take place.

If the debtor doesn’t show up to that hearing, the hammer of justice can come down hard and fast. From there, the judge can order the debtor in contempt of court and issue a warrant for their arrest. If this seems unnecessarily punitive, the price to get out of jail is even more so, say consumer advocates: Generally, the judge sets the cost of bail at the amount of the disputed debt, an amount which is then turned over to the creditor.

“This is the private use of government resources to collect debt,” Pete Barry, partner at law firm Barry & Slade LLC, told Walletpop. One of Barry’s clients was arrested at her workplace for not filling out and sending back a form demanded by the creditor. The client, Barry says, suffered the humiliation of having to have her boss come to the jail and post a bond before she could be released. The bond money, he added, was turned over to the creditor. “They’re using the court system as their collection agent,” he says.

“There are big issues,” says Ira Rhinegold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates. “Minnesota isn’t the only place it’s happening, but it seems to be the worst. They’re leading the way,” he says, noting that NACA has heard similar stories out of Wisconsin, New Jersey, Arkansas and Washington.

Rhinegold tells Walletpop that some unscrupulous debt collectors never even send debtors the required notification that the case is being taken to court. Then the debtor fails to show up and the collector wins a default judgment, which can pave the way for imprisonment until they post their bond.

What’s behind all of this? “In some ways it stems from the growth of the debt buying industry,” says Rhinegold. Collection agencies buy debt for pennies on the dollar, then hire lawyers to chase after even the smallest amounts. Of all of the unfair aspects of this chain of events, advocates say the most galling is that, in many cases, consumers may not even be legally responsible for the debts for which they’re being jailed. In fact, the debt may not even be theirs, the amount may be inflated by penalties and attorney’s fees, and it’s almost certainly been written off by the original creditor — who then resold it for pennies on the dollar to a debt-collection firm that plays hardball to get money from consumers. Often, says Rhinegold, the collector doesn’t even have the paperwork that would prove that existence of the debt. In these cases, the judge will dismiss the case against the debtor. All the debtor had to do was show up for their day in court.

For this reason, Gail Hillebrand, financial services campaign manager at nonprofit Consumers Union, says it’s vitally important for consumers to respond if you get a letter threatening legal action and requiring a court appearance. The name of the collector can change because of how often debt is resold, she warns. So if you have an outstanding debt, don’t assume that a notice that seems to come from a different company than the original lender is junk mail. “The problem is that people don’t realize what it is,” she says.

It’s important to do some research first, though. If the debt isn’t yours, you can dispute it. Even if it is, showing up to court can sometimes lead to an outcome in your favor if the collector can’t prove you owe the debt. Either way, it will keep you from being hauled off in handcuffs.

Ex-US judge pleads guilty for ‘cash for kids’ scam

 



Obama Wants to Throw Pot Smokers in Prison for Driving

Feds Move to Throw Pot Smokers in Prison for Impaired Driving
Did you smoke pot last month and drive a car this morning? Obama wants to arrest and incarcerate you!

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
May 20, 2010

If you smoked marijuana last week or even last month and you drive a car, you may be sent to prison under new guidelines drafted by the federal government.

The Obama administration released its National Drug Control Strategy guidelines last week. The federal government wants all of the states to adopt its authoritarian and draconian diktat and expand the drug war. From the guidelines:

    Encourage States To Adopt Per Se Drug Impairment Laws [ONDCP]. State laws regarding impaired driving are varied, but most State codes do not contain a separate offense for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). Therefore, few drivers are identified, prosecuted, or convicted for DUID. Law enforcement personnel usually cite individuals with the easier to prove driving while intoxicated (DWI) alcohol charges. Unclear laws provide vague signals both to drivers and to law enforcement, thereby minimizing the possible preventive benefit of DUID statutes. Fifteen states have passed laws clarifying that the presence of any illegal drug in a driver’s body is per se evidence of impaired driving. ONDCP will work to expand the use of this standard to other states and explore other ways to increase the enforcement of existing DUID laws.

Cannabis metabolites can remain detectable in the urine for up to 100 days or longer for a regular cannabis consumer and up to fifteen days for the casual consumer, according to NORML, the marijuana advocacy organization. In other words, even if a pot smoker is conscientious and does not drive while intoxicated, that person can be arrested and convicted for DUID days or weeks after consuming marijuana. It would not matter if you are sober as a teetotaler — if THC molecules are detected with a urine or blood test, you are probably going to prison. You can kiss the right to vote and own a firearm sayonara.

In 2007 there were 14.5 million current users of marijuana in the United States, compared with 14.6 million in 2002, while the number of Americans who have used marijuana increased.

The following states enforce “zero tolerance” draconian DUID laws:

    Arizona: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.
    Delaware: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites.
    Georgia: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 12 months upon conviction.
    Illinois: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 12 moths upon conviction.
    Indiana: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 60 days upon conviction.
    Michigan: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 93 days upon conviction, vehicle immobilization for up to 180 days.
    Nevada: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites.
    Ohio: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 72 hours in jail, up to 6 months upon conviction, 6 month to 3 year license suspension.
    Pennsylvania: DUID for cannabis metabolites, amount unclear.
    South Dakota: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites for persons under the age of 21.
    Utah: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 48 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.

Obama’s new guidelines will criminalize and add to the system hundreds of thousands of people and add thousands of people to the prison industry slave labor complex. In 2007 an American was arrested on marijuana charges every 36 seconds. Obama will increase this criminalization rate significantly.

DUI checkpoints are on the rise around the country. In California, for instance, the state increased grants in 2009 by 47% for DUI checkpoints, including “roving” DUI patrols. 2010 was predicted to be “the year of the Checkpoint” in California. In California and elsewhere, these unconstitutional checkpoints are a highly profitable business for the state, netting billions of dollars every year.

Behavioral impairment is not the issue. Expanding the criminal class is the issue. Government will never rest until it categorizes most of us as criminals.

Video: Hypocrite Obama inhaled “frequently.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpBzQI_7ez8

Canadian extradited to U.S., jailed for selling pot seeds

 



Crime Prediction Software Is Here and It’s a Very Bad Idea

Crime Prediction Software Is Here and It’s a Very Bad Idea

GIZMODO
April 14, 2010

There are no naked pre-cogs inside glowing jacuzzis yet, but the Florida State Department of Juvenile Justice will use analysis software to predict crime by young delinquents, putting potential offenders under specific prevention and education programs. Goodbye, human rights!

They will use this software on juvenile delinquents, using a series of variables to determine the potential for these people to commit another crime. Depending on this probability, they will put them under specific re-education programs. Deepak Advani—vice president of predictive analytics at IBM—says the system gives “reliable projections” so governments can take “action in real time” to “prevent criminal activities?”

Really? “Reliable projections”? “Action in real time”? “Preventing criminal activities”? I don’t know about how reliable your system is, IBM, but have you ever heard of the 5th, the 6th, and the 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution? What about article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? No? Let’s make this easy then: Didn’t you watch that scientology nutcase in Minority Report?

Sure. Some will argue that these juvenile delinquents were already convicted for other crimes, so hey, there’s no harm. This software will help prevent further crimes. It will make all of us safer? But would it? Where’s the guarantee of that? Why does the state have to assume that criminal behavior is a given? And why should the government decide who goes to an specific prevention program or who doesn’t based on what a computer says? The fact is that, even if the software was 99.99% accurate, there will be always an innocent person who will be fucked. And that is exactly why we have something called due process and the presumption of innocence. That’s why those things are not only in the United States Constitution, but in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights too.

Other people will say that government officials already makes these decisions based on reports and their own judgement. True. It seems that a computer program may be fairer than a human, right? Maybe. But at the end the interpretation of the data is always in the hands of humans (and the program itself is written by humans).

But what really worries me is that this is a first big step towards something larger and darker. Actually, it’s the second: IBM says that the Ministry of Justice in the United Kingdom—which has an impeccable record on not pre-judging its citizens—already uses this system to prevent criminal activities. Actually, it may be the third big step, because there’s already software in place to blacklist people as potential terrorist, although most probably not as sophisticated as this.

IBM clearly wants this to go big. They have spent a whooping $12 billion beefing up its analytics division. Again, here’s the full quote from Deepak Advani:

    Predictive analytics gives government organizations worldwide a highly-sophisticated and intelligent source to create safer communities by identifying, predicting, responding to and preventing criminal activities. It gives the criminal justice system the ability to draw upon the wealth of data available to detect patterns, make reliable projections and then take the appropriate action in real time to combat crime and protect citizens.

If that sounds scary to you, that’s because it is. First it’s the convicted-but-potentially-recidivistic criminals. Then it’s the potential terrorists. Then it’s everyone of us, in a big database, getting flagged because some combination of factors—travel patterns, credit card activity, relationships, messaging, social activity and everything else—indicate that we may be thinking about doing something against the law. Potentially, a crime prediction system can avoid murder, robbery, or a terrorist act.

It actually sounds like a good idea. For example, there are certain patterns that can identify psychopaths and potential killers or child abusers or wife beaters. It only makes sense to put a future system in place that can prevent identify potential criminals, then put them under surveillance.

The reality is that it’s not such a good idea: While everything may seem driven by the desire to achieve better security, one single false positive would make the whole system unfair. And that’s not even getting into the potential abuse of such a system. Like the last time IBM got into a vaguely similar business for a good cause, during the 1930s. They shipped a lot of cataloguing machines to certain government in Europe, to put together an advanced census. That was good. Census can improve societies by identifying needs and problems that the government can solve. At the end, however, that didn’t end well for more than 11 million people.

And yes, this comparison is an extreme exaggeration. But one thing is clear: No matter how you look at it, cataloguing people—any kind of people—based on statistical predictive software, and then taking pre-empetive actions against them based on the results, is the wrong way to improve our society. Agreeing with this course of action will inevitably take us into a potentially fatal path. [Yahoo!]

Obama Implements ‘Precrime’ ‘Prolonged Detention’ for Detainees

 



Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest

Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest

Wired
March 10, 2010

Josh Gerstein over at Politico sent Threat Level his piece underscoring once again President Barack Obama is not the civil-liberties Knight In Shining Armor many were expecting.

Gerstein posts a televised interview of Obama and John Walsh of America’s Most Wanted. The nation’s chief executive extols the virtues of mandatory DNA testing of Americans upon arrest, even absent charges or a conviction. Obama said, “It’s the right thing to do” to “tighten the grip around folks” who commit crime.

When it comes to civil liberties, the Obama administration has come under fire for often mirroring his predecessor’s practices surrounding state secrets, the Patriot Act and domestic spying. There’s also Gitmo, Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

Now there’s DNA sampling. Obama told Walsh he supported the 18 states, including the federal government, that have varying laws requiring compulsory DNA sampling of individuals upon an arrest for crimes ranging from misdemeanors to felonies. The data is lodged in state and federal databases, and has fostered as many as 200 arrests nationwide, Walsh said.

The American Civil Liberties Union claims DNA sampling is different from mandatory, upon-arrest fingerprinting that has been standard practice in the United States for decades.

A fingerprint, the group says, reveals nothing more than a person’s identity. But much can be learned from a DNA sample, which codes a person’s family ties, some health risks, and, according to some, can predict a propensity for violence.

The ACLU is suing California to block its voter-approved measure requiring saliva sampling of people picked up on felony charges. Authorities in the Golden State are allowed to conduct so-called “familial searching” — when a genetic sample does not directly match another, authorities start investigating people with closely matched DNA in hopes of finding leads to the perpetrator.

Wondering whether DNA sampling is legal?

The courts have already upheld DNA sampling of convicted felons based on the theory that the convicted have fewer privacy rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that when conducting intrusions of the body during an investigation, the police need so-called “exigent circumstances” or a warrant. That alcohol evaporates in the blood stream is the exigent circumstance to draw blood from a suspected drunk driver without a warrant.

 



Texas Schoolkids Tagged With GPS Tracking Devices

Texas Schoolkids Tagged With GPS Tracking Devices

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
January 22, 2010

A judge has ordered 22 students at Bryan Highschool in Texas to carry GPS tracking devices in the name of preventing truancy, another example of how schools are now youth internment centers – preparatory camps for brainwashing kids to accept the prison planet.

“Bryan High students who skip school will soon be tracked 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” reports KBTX.

“It’s called the Attendance Improvement Management Program or AIM, and it has been used across Texas and the United States.”

Students who skip class are now forced to attend “truancy court” and be lectured by a judge before being mandated to carry a GPS tracking device.

“Students on the program are tracked with a hand-held GPS device between the time they leave for school in the morning and the time they check in for curfew at night.”

Watch the clip below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13qr1WhCuTU

Not only are children being treated as criminals if they skip class, parents too are being targeted if they turn up late to collect their kids. A story we broke back in 2006 highlighted how a junior high school in Indiana threatens parents with police and child protective service involvement if they fail to pick up their child on time after mandatory Friday classes for missed homework.

The school stated that if parents didn’t arrive at the agreed time to pick up their child, “arrangements have been made with the Tell City Police Department to have them housed at the police station.”

The letter then states that intervention by the police will also necessitate involvement of the Perry County Office of Family and Children. In other words – get stuck in a traffic jam and you could get your kids snatched by the state and fed into the pedophile-infested government “care” system.

Read Full Article Here

Parents Arrested For Not Registering Kids in School

 



Study: Youths sexually abused in juvenile prisons

Study: Youths sexually abused in juvenile prisons

USA Today
January 7, 2010

More than 12% of youths in juvenile prisons are sexually abused while in custody there, according to a Justice Department study out Thursday, and the vast majority of cases involve female staff and boys under their supervision.

In the worst facilities surveyed — in Indiana, Maryland, North Carolina and Texas — more than 30% of youths reported they had been sexually victimized. The study, the first of its kind, shows a rate of sexual assault more than seven times higher than that indicated by a 2008 Justice Department report that collected sexual abuse claims to juvenile facility administrators. It is also higher than a similar study of adult prisons because of the “very high rate of staff sexual misconduct,” said Allen Beck, who directed the survey for the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

The survey of 9,198 youths ages 13 to 21 — all in custody by order of a juvenile court — included methods to eliminate interviews considered unreliable. The survey covered 195 facilities, at least one in each state. Approximately 26,550 juveniles — 91% of them boys — are held in more than 500 such facilities around the country.

The survey showed that 10.3% of youths reported the sexual contact was with staff, compared with 2.6% who reported sexual victimization by other youths. In nearly half the incidents with staff, youths reported having sexual contact as a result of force.

The study sets a wider definition of sexual contact than rape, Beck said. Nonetheless, “these are all things that in the outside world would be considered violent or, by definition in law, they are illegal,” he said.

Sexual victimization of youths in custody “is one of those hidden closets of the system,” said Bart Lubow, director of the juvenile justice and strategy group for the Annie E. Casey Foundation, which advocates for children. The rates at the worst facilities are “so high they’re stunning,” he said. “I am, on the other hand, never surprised as people peel the layers of the youth corrections onion and expose more and more things that make you cry.”

Linda McFarlane of Just Detention International, an advocacy group focused on eliminating sexual abuse in prison, called the highest rates of abuse “shocking beyond belief.”

“The incredibly high rates of staff misconduct is shocking and disturbing,” McFarlane said. “We just need to do a better job with training and recruitment and hiring and supervision.”

The survey showed that gay youths reported higher levels of sexual abuse from other juveniles, and so did youths who had been abused before coming to the facility.

That makes the survey valuable for juvenile facilities other than the type covered in the survey, she said. “While we can’t say we know what’s happening in, say, the smaller group-home settings … we can look at the information in this report and use it to protect those (particularly vulnerable) kids.”

In Maryland, where 36% of youths surveyed at Backbone Mountain Youth Center said they had been victimized, the state Department of Juvenile Services said in a statement Thursday there will be an independent investigation by the state human resources and health agencies.

At Pendleton Juvenile Correctional Facility in Indiana, which also had among the highest rates of abuse in the study, four female guards were suspended a month ago after a report of sexual abuse, said Edwin Buss, state corrections commissioner.

Indiana officials say their own surveys show a much lower rate of sexual victimization.

“We’re not denying that this happens,” said Amanda Copeland, executive director of research and technology for the state Corrections Department. “We would be foolish to say that it never happens. We’re just questioning the extent to which it’s being reported” by the Justice Department. But the survey “gives us something to work with. Whether we agree with the percentages or the ratings or not, we recognize that we have issues and we need to address them, and we’re taking steps to do so.”

 



Parents Arrested For Not Registering Kids in School

“Education has two very different purposes; on the one hand it aims at developing the individual and giving him knowledge which will be useful to him; on the other hand it aims at producing citizens who will be convenient for the State or the Church which is educating them.” –Bertrand William Russell

Parents Arrested For Not Registering Kids in School, May Lose Custody

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 6, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPwQRazAvVM

In a move designed to send a message to parents, a Montgomery County, New York, couple were arrested and ticketed for homeschooling their children and failing to register them with the school district.

“Richard Cressy, 47, and Margie Cressy, 41, both of the town of Glen, never registered their four children or their home-schooling curriculum with the local school district, said the Sheriff’s Office,” reports WRGB, a CBS affiliate in Albany, New York. “The Superintendent of the Fonda-Fultonville Central School District confirmed the four children, ranging in age from 8 to 14, had not been registered with the school district for the last seven years.”

The couple may lose custody of their children. The case has been turned over to the Montgomery County District Attorney and the Child Protective Unit.

On his radio show today, Alex Jones said the arrest and demand that parents turn their offspring over to the state is like a scene out of Planet of the Apes. In the cult classic, apes hunt humans and intern them in a slave gulag. Police and the CPS are acting like apes on the hunt. Jones pointed out that there is no law in New York criminalizing homeschooling and the arrest was predicated on a color of law regulation.

Local and state governments around the country have moved to criminalize homeschooling and force children to attend dangerous public schools. In 2008 in California, an appeals court ruled that parents do not have a constitutional right to home-school their children.

Earlier this year, a German couple asked for asylum in the United States after the German government ruled that homeschooling their children was illegal. Uwe Romeike and his family moved to Tennessee after the state threatened to fine him and take away his children. Romeike, an evangelical Christian, objects to German school textbooks containing language and ideas that conflict with his family’s values.

Provisions in the California Education Code require “persons between the ages of six and eighteen” to be in “public full-time day school,” or a “private full-time day school” or “instructed by a tutor who holds a valid state teaching credential for the grade being taught.” The 2nd Appellate Court in Los Angeles argued that “keeping the children at home deprived them of situations where they could interact with people outside the family.” In other words, that court ruled that parents have no right to decide who their children interact with socially and that decision will be left to the state and bureaucrats.

The ruling dramatically affects more than 200,000 homeschooled children in California.

The California educational system is notorious for its pro-homosexual curriculum. Children attending California government schools are taught explicitly to avoid “discriminatory attitudes and practices” toward homosexuals in accordance with state laws that fund revised curriculum and unspecified “tolerance” programs, writes Julie Foster.

In addition to “tolerance” programs, public education emphasizes sex eduction (teaching children how to be promiscuous) and suicide and death education.

A study conducted in 2002 revealed that public schools are infested with drugs. Half of all teens — and 60 percent of high school teens — report that drugs are used, kept, or sold at their schools. Students at these schools are three times more likely to smoke, drink, or use illicit drugs than students whose schools are substance-free, according to the study.

According to officials in New York and California, parents have no right to protect their children from drugs or shelter them from sexual and social brainwashing contrary to their values.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bOl0EC74Cg

Read Full Article Here

 

Charlotte Iserbyt – Deliberate Dumbing Down of Children

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDyDtYy2I0M

 

You own absolutely nothing, not even your own kids!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0Itvml2mgQ

Agenda 21 Alert: Obama’s $250 Million Plan to Brainwash Your Children

Germany Prosecutor to Homeschoolers: You’re Going to Jail

The Scientific Manipulation of Our Reality