After five decades, the mysteries behind the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X may finally get the scrutiny they deserve.
A group consisting of relatives of the Kennedy and King families, as well as their confidantes and other prominent voices, is calling for a Truth and Reconciliation Committee to get to the bottom of these tragic murders.
Over the decades, those in power, whether in government, media, or academia, have contended that all of these murders were simply the result of lone-wolf actors: There was “no collusion,” and please don’t mention that other “C” word — conspiracy.
But parallel to these affirmations, an ever-growing group of dissenters has pointed out the inconsistencies in the official narratives. They have demonstrated that those events could not have unfolded the way we’ve been taught on TV and in standard textbooks. Indeed, the evidence of a deeper and darker story is so compelling that one must begin to ask why those in power are not investigating further?
Fortunately, the advent of the internet has made possible new methods of collaboration between journalists, academics and citizen-researchers that have opened up new paths for investigation.
At WhoWhatWhy, we’ve continually challenged the narratives of some of the most consequential events of 20th-century US history: events that forever altered the direction of the country — and not for the better.
We are excited to share with you the announcement from this special group. It is composed of three parts: an initial news release, a call to action, and a joint statement. We hope you read it and share it widely….
The MSM isn’t worth the effort. Apparently the idea is to keep you busy chasing white rabbits so you don’t notice the important news.
Following what the Washington Post has described as “the highest-profile misstep yet for a news organization during a period of heightened and intense scrutiny of the press,” mass media representatives are now flailing desperately for an argument as to why people should continue to place their trust in mainstream news outlets.
On Thursday Buzzfeed News delivered the latest “bombshell” Russiagate report to fizzle within 24 hours of its publication, a pattern that is now so consistent that I’ve personally made a practice of declining to comment on such stories until a day or two after their release. “BOOM!” tweets were issued by #Resistance pundits on Twitter, “If true this means X, Y and Z” bloviations were made on mass media punditry panels, and for about 20 hours Russiagaters everywhere were riding the high of their lives, giddy with the news that President Trump had committed an impeachable felony by ordering Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about a proposed Trump office tower in Moscow, a proposal which died within weeks and the Kremlin never touched.
There was reason enough already for any reasonable person to refrain from frenzied celebration, including the fact that the story’s two authors, Jason Leopold and Anthony Cormier, were giving the press two very different accounts of the information they’d based it on, with Cormier telling CNN that he had not personally seen the evidence underlying his report and Leopold telling MSNBC that he had. Both Leopold and Cormier, for the record, have already previously suffered a Russiagate faceplant with the clickbait viral story that Russia had financed the 2016 election, burying the fact that it was a Russian election….
No wonder CA attracts pedophiles. It’s a haven for them. And no wonder CA is open to the “migration” of children from other countries across its border.
California Proposition 35 made sweeping changes to California’s child sex trafficking laws. On November 6, 2012, over ten million people in California voted in favor of the act, making it the most successful ballot in California history. Over 80% of voters voted in favor of Prop 35 and it is easy to see why: increased penalties for traffickers, mandatory law enforcement training, designation of fines from convicted traffickers for victims, and requirement of sex traffickers to register as sex offenders are among some of the changes to California law that were enacted.
Proposition 35 was not met without opposition, however. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of anonymous sex offenders to prohibit enforcement of a provision which requires buyers of sex with children to register their online identifiers as part of their sex offender registry requirements. Buyers, under Prop 35, would be forced to disclose their internet identities and activities once convicted for an offense against a child. Information about the buyer’s online presence would then be used by the community and law enforcement to protect children against repeat exploitive behaviors.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California upheld a lower court’s decision to enjoin the provision regarding registration of buyer’s online identifiers, holding that the provision is an unconstitutional burden on free speech for the sex offender. In making this decision, the court gave greater constitutional weight to the privacy of sex offenders than the protection of children. Complete online privacy and anonymity, in the holding of the court, is a right which even convicted child predators deserve. How did privacy become a more compelling societal interest than protection of children?…
Convicted child predators often have their rights taken away by courts. In many states, a buyer on the sex offender registry is forbidden from living within a specified distance from a school or child care agency. Society chooses to establish these restrictions in order to reduce the availability and access to children for child predators. The internet should not be an exception. In an age where nearly everyone has a digital identity, including children, shouldn’t predators be restricted from access to children online? The Ninth Circuit says no, despite inconsistency with federal law.
Convicted criminals forfeit privileges in society because of the decisions they made to exploit the vulnerable in our society. Sex offenders should not be allowed to retain privacy privileges at the cost of the reality of the re-offenders among them using that privacy to contact and exploit more children. Many buyer cases involve a digital interaction using social media or classified websites. If buyers remain anonymous on the internet, they will continue to use these websites to target and approach children.
Protection of the vulnerable in society is among the fundamental roles of government. Privacy cannot be given to convicted criminals at the cost of protecting vulnerable youth from child predators. Upon appeal of this decision, the Supreme Court will have an opportunity to hear this case and undo the damage being done by the injunction from the Ninth Circuit. The urgency and magnitude of the outcome of this battle cannot be overstated.
National change is happening on the state level and buyers are subject to sex offender registration in many states. Increasing pressure on buyers and making sure that they are restricted from access to places where children can be contacted, including the internet, must be a part of a state’s response to child sex trafficking. Learn about how putting buyers on the sex offender registry addresses demand and see how your state stacks up against other states in the fight against demand so you can take action.
Please see the original with live links at https://sharedhope.org/2014/12/ninth-circuit-privacy-buyers-sex-children-outweighs-protection-children/ and read more about the problems of sex trafficking at https://sharedhope.org/ – See also, http://www.AmericasMIAchildren.com