#phroyd's world

[phroyd]

Husband, Lover, Partner ..... They DO get a say, let's not get too carried away with our own Self-Importance!  Additionally, Free Health Care for those women who can't afford it ... Absolutely, with No strings attached!  State Serial Abortion as Birth Control or State Supported  Multiple Births, ....I don't THINK so!

[phroyd]

Cross-Border Child Custody, a Legal Tangle By Emilio Godoy

MEXICO CITY, Jan 14, 2012 (IPS) - Mexican or foreign-born children being held by one of their parents in this or another country are caught up in a legal tangle marred by red tape and the arbitrary powers of judges, according to experts. The claim for restitution of an under-age child taken to another country, or to Mexico, is based on the Inter-American Convention on International Restitution of Minors (IACIRM), ratified by Mexico in 1994, and the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, which came into force in 1983.  "Lawmakers are not necessarily familiar with the provisions of the conventions. Most judges do not use them as references in their decisions. And the red tape, when a child is abducted from or brought to Mexico, is a real ordeal for the families," Martín Pérez, head of the Network for Children's Rights in Mexico (REDIM), told IPS.  Moreover, the families "have to undertake the search for their children using their own resources," added Pérez, the executive director of REDIM, a coalition of 63 NGOs that carries out programmes for vulnerable children and adolescents.  In 2008, there were 272 petitions for the return of children to custody, compared to 123 in 2003, according to the Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. These figures do not include petitions brought under the IACIRM.  And there were 168 demands for restitution under the IACIRM in 2008, an increase of 522 percent compared with 2003.  Fifteen Latin American and Caribbean nations reported 315 petitions for the return of minors in 2008, equivalent to 16 percent of the world total. In 61 of these cases, both countries involved were within the region.  In 2010, there were 221 such cases in Mexico; 101 of them involved the abduction from this country to others of 141 children or adolescents; and the remaining 120 cases involved 169 irregular transfers of minors from other countries to Mexico, according to the foreign ministry, which is the designated central authority in Mexico tasked with fulfilling the provisions of the Hague Abduction Convention. 

[phroyd]

\

TOPIC

Crime

TUESDAY, JAN 17, 2012 11:36 AM EASTERN STANDARD TIME

Should the government search your brain?

The state may soon be able to force you to reveal your password. That's a huge threat to the Fifth Amendment

In this brave new world of invasive technology, one of the easiest way to understand the relevance of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is to understand it through the prism of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of “unreasonable searches and seizures.” Essentially, the Fifth Amendment’s notion that you cannot be “compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against oneself” is a declaration that self-incriminating information in your mind is privileged, and that government efforts to get that information is, in fact, an “unreasonable search and seizure.” Put another way, these constitutional protections say the government cannot get a search warrant for your brain, nor can it hold you in contempt of court for refusing to disclose any self-incriminating information in your cortex.

Enshrined in our highest governing document, this principle had been considered uncontroversial for most of American history. But then we saw the advent of state-sanctioned torture and forced confessions in the last decade, and now a new criminal prosecution in Denver may end up with a court declaring that the mind can be forcibly opened to searches under a threat of jail time.

Continue Reading

David Sirota is a best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. E-mail him at [email protected], follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at www.davidsirota.com.

[phroyd]

John Boehner!

Republican John Boehner : Voted NO on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Apr 2009) Voted NO on expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program. (Jan 2009) Voted NO on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare. (Jul 2008) Voted NO on giving mental health full equity with physical health. (Mar 2008) Voted NO on Veto override: Extend SCHIP to cover 6M more kids. (Jan 2008) Voted NO on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Oct 2007) Voted NO on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Jan 2007)

[phroyd]

Walker Thinks He's Immune!

GO VISCONSIN!!! SHOW THE OLIGARCHS AND ALL OF AMERICA ONCE AGAIN THAT YOU ‘CANNOT’ BE BUFFALOED!!! Walker opponents to submit recall petitions http://news.yahoo.com/walker-opponents-submit-recall-petitions-080354302.html Organizers say they have gathered far more than the 540,208 signatures required to force the election against both Walker and GOP Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch. If so, it would mark the first time such a recall campaign has been mounted against a Wisconsin governor. Organizers say they also will turn in enough signatures targeting the Wisconsin Senate majority leader and three other GOP senators. Walker, meanwhile, has been aggressively raising money and blanketing the airwaves with campaign ads, starting the night before recall petitions hit the streets in mid-November. He's also crisscrossed the country raising millions of dollars, taking full advantage of both the conservative rock star persona built as he put Wisconsin at the center of the national labor rights debate and a quirk in state law allowing those targeted for recall to ignore normal contribution limits until an election date is set. There have been just two successful gubernatorial recalls in the nation's history — against California Gov. Gray Davis in 2003 and North Dakota Gov. Lynn Frazier in 1921. But recalls have become common in Wisconsin since the political tumult of 2011 that saw Walker and Republicans pass a law effectively ending collective bargaining rights for most public workers. The opposition started with massive protests and then grew into organized campaigns first to recall state senators and then Walker himself. Last summer, six Republican state senators and three Democrats faced recall elections. Two Republicans lost, leaving the party with a narrow one-vote majority in the Senate. Rachel Maddow: : "BAKE SALES VS BILLIONAIRES" for Democracy [VIDEO] http://www.politicususa.com/en/rachel-maddow-wisconsin-truth

Rachel Maddow: : "BAKE SALES VS BILLIONAIRES" for Democracy [VIDEO] http://www.politicususa.com/en/rachel-maddow-wisconsin-truth REMEMBER!: Wisconsin had PLENTY of money in it's coffers before Tea Party Governor Walker gave millions of dollars in tax breaks to corporations just before beginning this fabricated budget scare. MADDOW ~ "WHAT IS GOING ON IN WISCONSIN AND THE MIDWEST AGAINST UNIONS IS ‘NOT’ ABOUT BUDGETS; THIS IS ABOUT ELECTIONS. THIS ABOUT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY GOING AFTER THE INSTITUTIONS THAT MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR DEMOCRATS TO WIN ELECTIONS IN AMERICA; THE LAST OF THE BIG MONEY SPENDERS AGAINST THE REPUBLICANS IN ELECTIONS; THE UNIONS." “UNIONS ARE ‘THE ONLY’ REMAINING COMPETITION THAT REPUBLICANS HAVE IN ELECTORAL POLITICS SINCE MUCH BIG BUSINESS HAS MOVED TO THE FAR RIGHT OUT OF GREED.” Otherwise it’s “Bake Sales vs Billionaires” for every election here on out. Democrats who don’t get that are either being willfully ignorant or are being brainwashed by the GOP/Tea Party “WOLVES IN SHEEPS’ CLOTHING”. (This telling report by Rachel Maddow is worth repeating. Watch it from beginning to end, save it and send it to anyone you now who is having trouble understanding this stand-off of Republican/Tea Party members of Congress against everything that seems responsible for the well-being of America. Then find out what it will take to recall these obstructive traitors in Congress so this country can someday get back on its feet. Waiting for the 2012 elections is too long. They could have us so far into a depression by then that could take forever to get out of. THAT is their GOAL ...so they can blame it on Obama and the Democrats and once again take over Capitol Hill. It is well established that “the TP/GOP = PARTY over PRAGMATISM”)

[phroyd]

[phroyd]

Wikipedia is going black on Wednesday, January 18, to help fight the contentious Protect IP Act (PIPA), which is set to go for a vote before the Senate on January 24. The move, first reported by Neal Mann, digital news editor at Sky News, was confirmed by Jimmy Wales, co-founder of the far-reaching online encyclopedia, on Twitter. Wales says the blackout was a “community decision.”

The blackout will only apply to English-language articles on Wikipedia — all 3,847,673 of them. It will run from 12am ET on Wednesday, through 11:59pm, says Wales, who estimates that as many as 100 million people will view the blocked protest pages.

Wales first proposed a blackout of the site in early December of last year, and asked the Wikipedia community for their input. According to a chart of the responses, created by hacker Shishir Bashyal, nearly 86.6 percent or respondents supported the move, while only 10.5 percent voice opposition to a Wikipedia blackout.

Wikipedia joins the likes of Reddit.com, BoingBoing.net, IHeartChaos.com, and the entire Cheezburger Network, among others, all of which will also be blacked out on Wednesday.

While now focused on PIPA, these planned blackouts were also originally intended to voice opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). This past weekend, however, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) told SOPA opponents in Congress that SOPA would not come up for a vote until consensus on the bill could be met. This follows a declaration from the White House that it would oppose any “legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet” — all of which SOPA and PIPA would do, according to critics of these bills.

[phroyd]

What happens to your Facebook when you die?

Digital assets often forgotten when wills are written

By CLAUDIA BUCK

McClatchy Newspapers

January 17, 2012 

When most people think about bequeathing their belongings, it's the obvious: the house, the car, bank accounts, the sentimental family mementos.

But what about our online "stuff"? With so many of us emailing, blogging, tweeting, Facebooking, eBaying and otherwise living online, it's clear that a huge portion of ourselves resides on the Web.

LEAVING THE KEYS TO YOUR 'DIGITAL ASSETS'

What are digital assets?

Any accounts that you open online, including email, social networking, photo-sharing, as well as websites and domain names you own.

Essentially, it means any account with a unique user name and password combination. However, online financial accounts, such as brokerage and banking, typically are considered "physical" assets that pass directly to your heirs.

How to be prepared: Give the following to a designated person:

An inventory of all your websites and online accounts

A list of passwords, user names, answers to security questions and other log-in information

Expiration dates and/or renewal instructions for domain names

Instructions on how each account should be managed, saved or deleted

If you can't find the keys

Ideally, we all leave instructions for where we want our online accounts to go after we're gone. If not, here are some guidelines for a deceased person's accounts:

Facebook: To report someone as deceased, Facebook requires documentation, such as a copy of the deceased's death certificate. Upon request, Facebook will "memorialize" the user's page, allowing friends and family to post memorial messages on the deceased's wall. The company says it allows only confirmed friends to view the page and prevents unauthorized users from logging on. Facebook also will honor requests from family or an executor to permanently close an account.

Gmail: Google's email program "extend(s) our condolences" but makes no guarantees that it will grant access to the deceased's email account. You must provide your name, address, email and a copy of your driver's license or government-issued ID. You'll need a copy of the deceased's email address, including the "headers" that show email tracking details. A copy of the death certificate is also required.

All of the above is mailed or faxed to the Google custodian of records at the company's Mountain View, Calif., office. After a review, you may — or may not — get clearance to proceed to the next step, which requires additional documentation. If your request is ultimately denied, Google warns that due to privacy concerns, "we will not be able to share further details "» or discuss our decision."

LinkedIn: To close a deceased's account, LinkedIn requires a "verification of death" form that includes the deceased's email address, LinkedIn profile URL and a death notice.

Twitter: If a Twitter user dies, the company says it can close the account and help family members recover the person's public tweets. It requires your name, contact information and relationship to the deceased, as well as a link to a public obituary.

YouTube: To access the deceased's YouTube account, you'll need to provide your contact information, a copy of the death certificate, as well as a power of attorney document. If it's a child's YouTube account, you'll need a copy of his or her birth certificate, but not a power of attorney document.

McClatchy Newspapers research