Infowars: City Of L.A. Targets Infowars Over “Illegally Posted Signs”
Mayor’s office tries to impose frivolous fine
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
February 19, 2013The City of Los Angeles is demanding payment from Infowars over the removal of “illegally posted signs” that were not produced by Infowars nor posted by any of its employees.
A letter from Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s office claims that, “An investigation has disclosed that you or your agent(s) have illegally posted signs on public property,” adding that such activity is a violation of California Penal Code.
The letters (one of which is posted below) demand payments totaling over $1,000 dollars within 20 days for the cost of removing the signs and threatens that more than three administrative fines will see the charge escalated to a misdemeanor which will be subject to “criminal violations.”
The City of L.A. is attempting to fine Infowars for signs that have nothing to do with the company. Image: Wikimedia Commons
However, the title of the removed signs is listed as, “VICTORY YOU ARE NOT ALONE UNITED WE STAND.”
Infowars has never produced bumper stickers or signs of any kind that feature this text.
Alex Jones comments, “This is a conscious fraud – the city of Los Angeles knows full well that we are not liable for someone else’s activities. There’s no due process, no evidence, no citation, nothing. The city of Los Angeles is engaging in unconstitutional extortion using terroristic threats of civil and criminal penalties and are threatening our credit if we don’t pay them more than a thousand dollars. By simply searching the term“Obama street art LA,” you can find hundreds of murals, sign and other street art depicting Obama in a favorable light. Under Los Angeles’ delusional legal theories, Barack Obama must immediately pay hundreds of dollars for each infraction.”
See examples of the Obama street art below.
A letter sent by Infowars in response to the fine reads, “We are not responsible for someone else’s actions. We are not in Los Angeles, nor do we have agents in Los Angeles. We do not have signs, stickers, or any such material that reads “VICTORY YOU ARE NOT ALONE, UNITED WE STAND.”
“This actually seems like a good way to set someone up. What would happen if someone posted Barack Obama stickers around town? Would you send this same letter/invoice to him? What if the signs read lacity.org? Do you see how ridiculous this is?”
Despite the fact that the signs posted in L.A. were not produced by Infowars and had nothing to do with the company, the stickers that we do retail are all sold with the following proviso.
“Infowars Stickers are only intended for legal and lawful use. Please refrain from defacing any public property. Respect your fellow citizens’ private property rights and do not post stickers without prior consent. Alex Jones and Free Speech Systems, LLC do not condone any illegal, prohibited or disrespectful use of Infowars.com stickers and are not liable for any damages resulting from the inappropriate use of these stickers.”
This has been going on for months and we have sent the city of L.A. three letters with no response. Authorities are simply trying to extort money on completely baseless legal grounds.
Read one of the invoice demands from the City of Los Angeles as well as our response below.
*********************
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.
Hacked Emails Reveal ‘Washington-Approved’ Plan to Stage Chemical Weapons Attack in Syria
Alleged hacked emails from defense contractor Britam reveal a plan “approved by Washington” and funded by Qatar to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime, fulfilling what the Obama administration has made clear is a “red line” that would mandate US military intervention.
The leaked emails, obtained by a hacker in Malaysia, feature an exchange (click here for screenshot) between Britam Defence’s Business Development Director David Goulding and the company’s founder Philip Doughty;
Phil
We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.
We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.
Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?
Kind regards
DavidThe fact that the plan involves delivering a CW (chemical weapon) that is “similar to those Assad should have,” clearly suggests that the idea is to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack that could be blamed on Assad by Gulf states like Qatar and NATO powers.
If the claim that such as plot was “approved by Washington” can be verified, then the Obama administration is complicit in a war crime.
Alex welcomes Ron Paul’s former congressional chief of staff and constitutional lawyer Lew Rockwell to give his take on the ensuing all out frontal assault on personal sovereignty.
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Judge: Army GI in WikiLeaks illegally punished
Jan 8, 6:16 PM (ET)
By DAVID DISHNEAU
(AP) Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, right, is escorted out of a courthouse in Fort Meade, Md.,…
Full ImageFORT MEADE, Md. (AP) - An Army private suspected of sending reams of classified documents to the secret-sharing WikiLeaks website was illegally punished at a Marine Corps brig and should get 112 days cut from any prison sentence he receives if convicted, a military judge ruled Tuesday.
Army Col. Denise Lind ruled during a pretrial hearing that authorities went too far in their strict confinement of Pfc. Bradley Manning for nine months in a Marine Corps brig in Quantico, Va., in 2010 and 2011. Manning was confined to a windowless cell 23 hours a day, sometimes with no clothing. Brig officials said it was to keep him from hurting himself or others.
Lind said Manning’s confinement was “more rigorous than necessary.” She added that the conditions “became excessive in relation to legitimate government interests.”
Manning faces 22 charges, including aiding the enemy, which carries a maximum sentence of life behind bars. His trial begins March 6.
// read more.. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130108/DA3MAHPO0.html
// no bill of rights in the US
UK calls for ban on kitchen knives (Cause they are used as weapons)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
The sooner we realize that anything can be used as a weapon. The sooner we can actually realize, that banning everything is NOT the answer. It still leaves us defenseless.
I again say, banning guns should be out of the question. It still leaves criminals to have weapons and leaves us defenseless. So even if we ban guns, they will use knives, then we ban those, then they use bats, then we ban those, then they use apples, then we ban apples. HOW MUCH FURTHER DO YOU WANNA GO?!.
Mainstream Media Declares War on 2nd Amendment
Post CT shooting, MSM pushes anti-gun agenda, ignores lawful gun owners stopping other mass shootings in the same week.
Melissa Melton
Infowars.com
December 17, 2012When an armed man opened fire on a crowded shopping mall in Oregon last week, 22-year-old Nick Meli pulled out his concealed carry permitted gun, and took cover in a store before taking aim.
“I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself,” Meli reported of the gunman’s suicide that followed to KGW News Channel 8. Two people died at the hands of the shooter before the man took his own life, but many more could have lost their lives in Oregon that day had Meli not been there.
Yesterday in San Antonio, Texas, two people were wounded in another movie theater shooting before an off-duty officer took the gunman down, wounding him and effectively ending the murder spree before anyone else could get hurt.
As with other shootings stopped by lawfully armed citizens, news about these two incidents has been widely limited to local media outlets and seemingly ignored otherwise. Why the mainstream blackout?
Even though the media has struggled with reporting the actual facts of the Connecticut shooting, all the national news outlets seem to have time to publish are propaganda pieces pushing gun control.
In Reuters this morning, one headline reads, “In Newtown, an Anguished Debate over Gun Rights, Controls,” and the subhead reads, “Two days after a gunman opened fire in a Connecticut elementary school, killing 26 people, several dozen parents and children gathered in a circle at Newtown’s public library to draw something positive from the town’s sudden, tragic notoriety” (emphasis added).
CNN’s Don Lemon used his airtime this morning to go on an anti-gun tirade, claiming mental health issues are secondary to gun availability.
News outlet Salon went to task posting gun control stories and targeting preppers on its site and official Twitter account all weekend, even writing a hit piece on Alex Jones. In “What’s a Prepper?,” Salon’s Katie McDonough notes, “Preppers believe having weapons is just as important as having enough water. They are also deeply suspicious of government overreach, sounding Tea Party-like…”
The Atlantic’s Senior Editor Robert Wright offered, “A Gun Control Law that Would Actually Work,” going beyond the assault weapons ban Senator Dianne Feinstein has promised she will introduce during Congress’ first 2013 session. Wright calls for a ban on any gun that can hold more than six bullets. Feinstein is not alone, either; USA Today is reporting “the most prominent pro-gun member of Congress” with an NRA “A” rating Senator Joe Manchin has announced the horrific mass shootings have “changed” him. Manchin is now calling for more control on public firearm purchasing power.
MSNBC asked, “Is the American Public Ready for Gun Control?” Politico gave us, “The Price of the Second Amendment,” presenting the argument that the lives of the children in Connecticut are what we must pay to have the right to keep and bear arms.
Anti-gun op-eds abound. The Huffington Post published, “Gun Control and Mental Health Funding—If Not Now, When?” and “The Real 2nd Amendment Isn’t the NRA Version.” The Washington Post posted, “Now Is the Time for Meaningful Gun Control.” The Christian Science Monitor declared, “Madison Never Meant Second Amendment to Allow Guns of Sandy Hook Shooting.”
In the wake of the Connecticut tragedy, a White House.gov citizen petition for “legislation that limits access to guns” put up the day of the school shooting already garnered over 150,000 signatures in just three days, breaking the record for the most-signed petition on the government’s site. People across the nation have also flocked to gun buyback programs to willingly turn their guns in.
Following an outcry on Facebook this weekend, the Discovery Channel announced its show “American Guns” was canceled. Even the National Rifle Association has fallen silent on social media sites, reportedly taking down its Facebook page and not responding on Twitter since the shooting.
As Alex Jones reported on his radio show today, “Here’s the real newsflash folks—they’re coming for our guns. Make no mistake.”
Although our government is responsible for the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal that put guns in Mexican drug cartel hands that have since resulted in thousands of deaths, and Obama’s drone strike kill list is reportedly responsible for the murders of nearly 200 children among thousands of dead innocents in the Middle East, the president somehow found the ability to wipe away fake tears at a press conference following the Connecticut school shooting.
In the Newtown massacre fallout, an all-out war has been declared on We the People’s right to keep and bear arms.
The mainstream media has politicized the Connecticut school shooting to the point that using the tragedy to demonize the 2nd Amendment has seemingly become an Olympic event. Where is the supposedly objective media now to report on the other examples of guns in the hands of properly permitted American citizens saving people’s lives?
Declaring we need stricter gun laws and to repeal the 2nd Amendment is synonymous with saying, “We want criminals and the government to be the only ones armed in America.” Because if our legal arms are stripped from law-abiding citizens, the only people who will have guns will be the government and the criminals.
The problem is, the line between the two is so blurry, it’s nearly impossible to tell who is who anymore.
“The lessons of history are numerous, clear and bloody. A disarmed population inevitably becomes an enslaved population. A disarmed population is without power, reduced to childlike obedience to—and dependence upon—the organs of a parental state. A disarmed population will lose—either piecemeal or in one sweeping act—those basic rights for which the citizens of America risked their lives and fortunes over two hundred years ago.” — Brian Puckett
Life Is Dangerous — Ban Everything
Melissa Melton
Infowars.com
December 18, 2012Although the tragic, senseless murder of 20 children in a Connecticut shooting last Friday has been hyped to demonize the 2nd Amendment, is it possible to ban everything that causes children harm just because one sick person decides to commit a heinous crime?
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, firearm homicides account for 2.7 child deaths (which includes all children under the age of 19) per 100,000 people here in America. To put this statistic in perspective, motor vehicle injuries account for nearly three times as many deaths at 8.1 children per 100,000. School bus accidents have killed whole classes of children in one fatal moment, but no one is clamoring to ban cars and school buses.
The 2011 F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report actually shows that American violence is down across the country. Violent crimes such as murder have officially dropped for the 5th year in a row; the number of American murders is now the lowest it has been in more than 40 years.
Children are the most fragile members of society. Unfortunately, history shows that gun bans do not stop mentally disturbed people from finding ways to commit school massacres.
Private ownership of guns is banned in China and almost completely forbidden in Japan. Over the years, gruesome mass school stabbings have become a familiar happening in those countries. In June 2001, a former janitor diagnosed with numerous mental disorders entered an Osaka elementary school and began stabbing children and teachers. He ultimately killed eight children and seriously wounded another 13 before he could be stopped. The crime reportedly took place in only ten minutes.
A Chinese man stabbed eight children to death as they were waiting for their parents outside an elementary school in March 2010. Elsewhere in China the following month, a man broke into a primary school and stabbed 18 students and a teacher. The very next day, the nation mourned when a man locked himself inside a kindergarten class with a knife and committed what was dubbed a copycat crime. Four more children died that day, and another 28 were wounded, including five left in critical condition.
In fact, just hours before Adam Lanza broke in to Sandy Hook School in Newtown, Connecticut and opened fire, another man walked into a Chinese elementary school armed with a kitchen knife and stabbed 23 children, reportedly because he was “psychologically affected” by the Mayan calendar predicting the end of the world. Reports claim some of these children were found to have had their ears and fingers cut off. This terrible scene is starting to become a common occurrence.
Knives are useful tools for many things, but the UK has banned carrying a knife in public “without good reason” unless the blade is three inches long or less. UK hospitals are not required to report knife-related crimes like gun crimes there, so there is no official reliable data on them. Still, should we ban knives here too, just in case?
While the Connecticut massacre is horrible, it is not the worst school massacre in American history. In 1927, a man decided to bomb a school in Bath Township, Michigan, ultimately killing 38 elementary children before killing himself in the final of three explosions. In his insanity, the man was able to murder nearly 40 children at a school with a single weapon, no gun involved. Nearly 170 children died in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, as the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building included an onsite daycare, again, no gun involved.
Hands are used to set incendiary devices. Should hands be banned?
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, drowning is the leading cause of death for children under the age of four and the second-leading cause for children between ages one and 14. Water kills lots of children every year. Should we ban water?
More people get fat with the aid of a fork and spoon than any other object, and obesity has been found to cause detrimental health effects that can lead to death. Should we ban eating utensils? After all, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has now launched a campaign against guns, has already banned large sugary drinks.
The National Safety Council reports that more people die of intentional self-harm each year than either auto accidents or assault. Should we ban ourselves?
Gun control has been shown to increase crime. Not to make light of the Connecticut tragedy, but where does it end?
Infowars Issues Emergency Terror Alert
Regardless of your personal feelings about Alex Jones, this story makes some good points about the continual upcoming war with Iran bombardment perpetrated by the mainstream media as of late…
Exclusive: Why Judge Andrew Napolitano Was Fired. REVEALED! (by TheAlexJonesChannel)
Alex Jones reporting from Infowars.com headquarters. After holding my tongue for a week, it is time to expose why Napolitano was unceremoniously fired from Fox News.
