Friday, January 25, 2013

The Lonesome Death of Aaron Swartz

“Information is power.  But like all power, there are those who want to keep it for themselves.” 
Aaron Swartz

So begins the dramatic story of a computer whiz kid’s untimely death and the overzealous prosecutor’s tactics in the case.  

Aaron Swartz, a young and brilliant programmer gained fame on the internet for co-developing the Rich Site Summary (RSS) which allows users to receive and read timely updates from web sites and blogs.  A bit of a rebel, Swartz was also a proponent of open access of everything on the Internet, and founded Demand Progress, which called for an end to Internet censorship bills (such as, SOPA/PIPA, which he played a key role in defeating).

Swartz’s crime?  On January 6, 2011 he arrested by the Feds for supposedly downloading thousands of academic journal articles from JSTOR.  The Federal prosecutors alleged they were worth millions of dollars.  And what is JSTOR?

Here’s a good description of JSTOR by science journalist Yoichi Shimatsu:

“The JSTOR archive is not owned or based at MIT, as media reports suggest, but is registered at the Network Connections server farm in Herndon, Maryland.  JSTOR is under the control of a nonprofit organization called ITHAKA, whose board of directors includes top university administrators and the W.W. Norton book publisher.”

Ironically, Aaron Swartz had a paid subscription to JSTOR, so he was hardly stealing anything.  JSTOR got all of the journals back, none were released out in the wild, none were sold by Swartz, and they never pressed any charges (though MIT did).  The Feds went hell for leather after Swartz with a possible 35-year prison sentence and over a million dollars in fines.  One thing that Swartz hated about JSTOR is that all of the authors of the scholarly journals are not paid, but their publishers are.  Lost in all of this is what Swartz was going to do with the journals.

The devil in red.  U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz

Carmen Ortiz
And who was the lead on this?  Carmen Ortiz, the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts. Christian Stork in his article, Carmen Ortiz Sordid Rap Sheet give a quick overview on one paragraph of Ortiz’s actions:

“Despite JSTOR’s subsequent securing of the ‘stolen’ content and refusal to press charges, Swartz was arrested by the feds and charged originally with four felony counts under the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. On those charges alone, Swartz was facing a possible 35-year sentence and over $1,000,000 in fines. Just three months ago, a ‘Superseding Indictment’ filed in the case by the U.S. attorney’s office upped the felony count from four to 13. If convicted, Swartz was looking at possibly over 50 years in prison: a conceivable life sentence.”

Stork goes on to document some of the Carmen Ortiz’s intrigues as a U.S. Attorney, particularly her attempt to take the motel property of one, Russ Caswell under the criminal forfeiture laws.  It seems there were 15 drug busts at the motel over a 14-year period.  According to Stork, a DEA agent examines property documents looking for real estate with numerous drug busts to basically seize, presumably in the name of the “public good.”  This is an example of why the criminal forfeiture laws are so wrong–it results in the government coveting property and basically stealing it.  In this case a seedy motel valued at over a million dollars, made even sweeter since it had no liens on it.  And even more unfair, just up the street from Coswell’s motel is a Motel 6, with far more drug arrests on that property.  You catch the drift...Motel 6 is a large corporate chain, they are the untouchables.  It’s the little guy they want to go after.  And Ortiz has a pattern of such schemes.  

The case is ongoing but shows a pattern of Carmen Ortiz’s nasty prosecutorial  behavior.  Namely, to come down heavy on the small fry.  

Back To Aaron
The curious thing is, why did they come down so hard on this guy?  What he did was minor compared to other goings on and it makes one wonder what kind of case the Fed’s had that work result in a conviction.  If he is guilty of anything it was trespass in a university server closet.  Aaron started out with 4 counts but Carmen Ortiz upped it to 13.  What?  And all for files that were returned to the owner with no charges filed by the owner.   It doesn’t make sense.   It should be noted that Swartz never pled guilty to any of the charges nor would accept a plea deal.  The Feds hate that.  It means they will have to work so harder to prove the charges against a defendant.  

On January 14 Aaron Swartz was found hanging in his apartment.  Curiously, another hacking case covered by a Carmen Ortiz colleague, Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Heymann, also resulted in a suicide of a teenage hacker Jonathan James, who was an unindicted co-conspirator in an earlier computer hacking case.  I’m just saying...

If Swartz was so confident in winning his case by not opting to plea bargain then would he despair enough to hang himself?  It’s been claimed he had a history of mental problems but I haven’t uncovered anything on that yet.  But that’s the usual M.O. for these situations.  The wicked have learned the best way to murder somebody is either to make it appear as an accident or a suicide. I should be noted that friends that saw him the day before his death said he was talkative and smiling.

The Book Has Been Thrown
No doubt, the government came down very hard on Aaron Swartz.  Severe enough warren concern and heavy criticism of Ortiz’s actions.  So far I’ve read some interesting theories as to what really went down.  One, written by Yoichi Shimatsu (previously mentioned) is that Swartz in the server closet had stumbled over a massive child porn network being run through MIT.  That’s pretty far out.  Shimatsu, writing from Hong Kong, names one man who I won’t mention here, as it’s an open invitation for libel in this country.  Just read his article listed in my sources to find out who.

Never the less, for the authorities to go after Swartz like this does give the appearance of something more to the story, some behind the scenes machinations that Swartz stumbled upon.

I think the trouble with people such as Aaron Swartz, Gary Webb, or even Andrew Breitbart is they want to play ball with the Big Boys, speaking truth to power.  But they don’t have a backup plan. I would have a path of flight arranged with a packed bag, stay close to home, avoid strangers, and possibly have access to a weapon.  Being a public figure is no longer protection from serious harm.  And being paranoid for a person like a Swartz or a Breitbart could be healthy.  It’s not like these guys can ride in with the white hats on and win the day in a fair fight.  Do they really think the Big Boys wouldn’t dare to go after them?  

They are the untouchables my friends, not you.

Addendum 2/20/13
FBI tracked Aaron Swartz, new files show.  LINK

Addendum 2/6/13
Photos of server closet that Aaron Swartz is supposed to have used.

Addendum 1/26/13
On 1/25/13, U.S. Magistrate Judge Judith Dein tossed out the Russ Caswell motel case.  Yay!  LINK


Aaron Swartz web site with links.

Christian Stork.

Freedom Rider: The State Killing of Aaron Swartz by Margaret Kimberley.  A highly recommended read.

Yoichi Shimatsu.

Alleged downloads by Aaron Swartz.

Notes on his death.

Carmen Ortiz’s office doubles down.

Feds go overboard in prosecuting information activist.

Ortiz’s Husband makes snarky comments on Twitter.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

The Geocachers Among Us

Geocacher thinking he's doing something in secret.

On day in March of 2012 I glanced out my front window and saw a red jeep drive up to the highway sign and a man got out and went to the base of the sign.  He crouched down and seemed to be doing something at the base of the post.  He shortly got up, went to his jeep and took off.  I wonder what was going on.  Did I witness a drug drop-off or pick-up?  Or maybe a money transference?  I even wondered if a spy network was operating out here.  Silly to consider now that I’ve had time to put it all in perspective.  It is a rural area, zoned for agriculture, and would be a good place conceal things. 

Over the next few weeks I started to see more people and cars showing up to fool around at the base of the sign.  All different types, from elderly to the young,  but all adults.  I went and looked at the base but didn’t see it at first, and only on a second examination did I see it.  A small, magnet key-holder box.  Oh, so people are hiding their keys at the base of a road sign out in the boonies?  I decided not to open it and see what happened.

I started to document these people coming and going in still photos and video clips.  I filmed them from my bedroom window.  Eventually, I called the Sheriff’s department and talked to a deputy there.  Basically, there was nothing to warrant any illegal activity so no police officer was going to come out for a look.  This was disappointing but I could understand their position since I hadn’t really seen anything that was actually illegal.  

Still seeing these people coming on going, mostly at noon, I decided to do some detective work of my own.  Late one night I drove out to the sign with my latex gloves, flashlight, and my camera. By 10 PM the traffic is nil so I was free to check it out undisturbed.  Removing the key-holder box I slowly opened it.  No keys!  Instead I discovered a long series of folded up papers, white, and stapled at one corner.  Written, in different inks form different pens and seemingly different writers.  dates and what appeared to be codes were written there such as BG35 and T.W.O.  

The contents of the key-holder box.
I had told a friend in Scotland about this curious event and told be about geocaching.  After doing some research online I found out who they were–Geocachers!  This is a hobby where people use the GPS that is built-in to most phones and geotag a location, put something there, in this case a key-holder box, and then post the coordinates on a geocaching web site.  Then other people show up to find it, and in this instance, write their initials or screen name down and the note which becomes a log.  In other instances just about anything could be in a cache.  Coins for example.  Or puzzles.  Caches are placed in parks, benches, rural areas, and generally anywhere out of prying eyes.  

It all amounts a secretive, inside game.  A game for geeks with it’s own underground culture.  I assume it allows people with too much time on their hands to play secret agent.  I frankly don’t get the attraction but whatever floats your boat.  For people to come out here to do this, takes up about 15 to 20 minutes just to get here, one way.  I guess the lure of the game is so great they don’t mind burning up the gas.  

Oh, and they call us non-players, Muggles

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Open Rebellion At iStockphoto

In 2012 I posted an article regarding the purchase of iStockphoto by Getty Images in 2006 and how rocky that business relationship has been over the intervening years.  

It has now taken a turn for the worse.  

The latest outrage amounts to a behind the scenes deal between Getty and Google to provide rights free images to Google Drive service.  This deal was in the works since October and November of 2012 but never announced to iStock’s contributors until one photographer, Sean Locke uncovered it and posted the specifics on the site forum.  This in turned, forced management to post an announcement with more details, none of which calmed the fears of contributors concerned about their content being devalued.  

To the dismay of many, the deal is fairly one sided in Getty and Google’s favor.  These images are free to all comers and while contributors were paid up to $12 for each image, all normal licensing agreements went discarded, as did the metadata in the files documenting copyrights.  These images can now be used in any commercial manner by whomever downloads it.  Once upon a time, models were assured strict policing of their likenesses being used inappropriately.  Not so with this Google arrangement.  Some photographers are also concerned as some of the free images feature pictures of children and some photographers use their own children as models.  Also, some fear a model suing them if they see their image used wrongly.  Much angst over that issue as with many other details.  

As one contributor stated in the forum discussion, “Why should I have my photos here for sale when anybody can have them free at Google?  Why indeed?  It should be pointed out that no contributor was given the option to opt out of this mess and management is clear that an “opt out” would never be given.  Yet many beg for it as if that will work.  It would be fair but these corporate goons have no feelings for such things as that.

With the artist supplier’s agreement (i.e. contract, ASA) so vaguely written with plenty of fancy lawyer talk, Getty is free do to as they please with the photographer’s, illustrator’s, and videographer's content.  It’s worded in such a way, that if they wanted to, they could place a photographer’s entire portfolio up for free at Google.  As one poster pointed out, the ASA may be breached because content is to be sold to the end user.  Since Google is not using said content but instead, posting it on a platform for free distribution all over the world, it would appear this is a contractual violation.  But alas, I am no lawyer.  Contributors are paid of course, but it’s a  one-time payment so Getty can say, with a straight face, that everybody was reimbursed as a result of this screwy deal.  

Ultimately, none of the makes any business sense and with Getty sneaking around behind contributor’s backs with these deals, which illustrates gross corporate malfeasance.  Many iStock members are in shock of this development, feel they can no long trust their agent/distributor, feel disrespected, and are ready to move on.

As contributor Leeavison pointed out:

“How on earth can this benefit contributors!! The entire rights to an image given away forever for $12. No back-link from Google, no artist acknowledgement. There is absolutely no benefit to contributing artists whatsoever as far as I can see!”

It really is outrageous what Getty did with this stunt, without the image creators being informed about what was going on, no permission asked for, licensing agreements tossed out the window, and copyrights ignored.  The hubris on display here is as great any despotic monarchy treating their subjects as they would their livestock.

D-Day - February 2
So what is a person to do against these corporate titans?  Many are openly ready to cast off their exclusivity and seek other agencies to sell through.  They have set a date of February 2nd to do a mass deleting of images from their portfolios and begin the process of shutting down.  However, I’ve have seen few of the major sellers announcing they will be doing such a thing.  Since I am a contributor as well, I’ll wait this one out and see how the pieces fall in place.

As I said in my last article on this issue, Getty did not buy iStockphoto with the intent of growing the brand.  The big fish eats the little fish.  The same is true in business, where greed is the hunger and it’s never sated. Getty considers iStock image makers to be a bunch of crowd sourced fodder to do with as they please.  As each controversy unfolds a new level of low is reached.  It’s comical in a way for them to bring on various “officials” some of which nobody has ever seen before, to try and explain each maneuver.  Some of the twisted logic employed is absurd, as if speaking such words would actually change reality and history.  But the sheep are not as believing as they once were with the multitude of broken promises that have occurred.  

About time.

Addendum 2/11/13
Sean Locke, the photographer that first posted information on the Getty/Google deal, in a shocking development, has been terminated from iStockphoto on 2/8.  He will no longer be able to sell his images there anymore.  Check out his blog posting for all of this played out HERE.  More on this in a new posting coming soon.

Addendum 1/22/13
So far, the projected number files to be deleted D-Day, February 2 by contributors at iStock is at over 30,000+.

Addendum 1/17/13
It should be noted that the files in this deal are mostly coming from iStock contributors.  None of Getty’s RM files are being used. iStock image creators are bearing the brunt of this.

Addendum 1/15/13
After posting this article today, iStock responded with a post from a Mr. Erin, one of their obscure admins.  He basically reposted some earlier bullet points regarding the Getty/Google deal which will most like do nothing to calm anyone’s fears.  Basically, nothing that image creators were concerned about, such as model release restrictions, no “opt out” for contributors, and so on.  There was a promise to look into copyright infringement and missing metadata, but their promises are a stall and often unfulfilled.  I don’t know why they bothered.  The issues that concerned people the most were not resolved in any way by today’s posting.  As usual, the administration is inept to say the least when it comes to communicating to the very people that make microstock tick.  

iStock announcement of the deal:

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Glen Beck Blasts Alex Jones

“1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms…”
Alex Jones

"That kind of vitriol, hatred, and zealotry is really quite scary. I didn't feel threatened by him, but I'm concerned that someone like him has that level of influence.”
Piers Morgan

“...Jones made a fool of himself, giving the left the perfect poster boy for their attempts to paint every logical conservative as an extremist nut job."
Glen Beck

“Jones is an agent provocateur, he wants a revolution. He won't be fighting in it, he'll be watching from his government safe-house.”
Chris Haywood

There is something about Glen Beck that just isn’t quite right.  It’s hard to place.  As if there is a sense of self loathing in the man.  Is he for real, or his whole gig a game?  A few years ago he did these promo shots crying for a magazine piece on him.  Strange.  The conservative radio talk-host turned television/internet entrepreneur is beehive of activity from starting his online news channel (branching to cable as well) to sponsoring and speaking at large outdoor “bring back America” rallies.  He seems to be interested in being a media titan with reality shows concept ideas and at last reporting, a theme park.  Beck had elevated his career to shows on CNN and FOX but they were both short lived.  Beck is no stranger to controversy and in recent years seems to revel in it.  Later in 2012 he started an uproar when he put a figure of President Obama in a jar of urine, calling it “Obama in Pee-pee” and putting it up for bid on eBay claiming it was art.  Where, it was promptly pulled.  Beck meanwhile, plays the role of innocent lamb in all of this nonsense. Of course something as silly as this will only generate publicity, tick a bunch of people off, and force eBay to pull it.  This incident has the taint of a contrived storm.  I think it was.  Beck has a bit of the agent provocateur in him and I don’t trust the man.

Meanwhile, rival Alex Jones, king of radio conspiracy advocates, claims Glen Beck is obsessed with him.  Jones claims Beck plagiarizes material off his Info Wars and Prison Planet web sites.  Even worse, Jones’ says that guests that appear on Beck’s shows are warned they won’t be back if they appear on Jone’s radio program.  He also claims when he get business ideas Beck lifts them too, such as Beck’s marketing of jeans made in America.  Jones said he had a similar idea but never got it to market.  This was not a coincidence to him.  Jones also thinks that Beck set him up over another phony controversy involving Agenda 21 ad, or what appeared to be an ad, on Beck’s The Blaze news web site.  A mention was made on Infowars and Beck used this to attack Jones on his radio show calling him a “piece of human garbage.”  Meanwhile. Alex thinks it was all a contrived.  I’m thinking it was since Beck is becoming such an oddball figure.  Remember the crying jags? 

It really exploded recently with Alex Jones’ appearance (1.7.13) on the Piers Morgan show on CNN.  Morgan, very British and very liberal took over Larry King’s spot on CNN.  His ratings haven’t been great, he has a dubious background involving being fired from a tabloid and a phone hacking scandal in England, and is notably against private ownership of guns.  So inviting Alex Jones on the show to discuss the issue was an invitation for fireworks and viewers got exactly that!  Jones, animated and bombastic as usual, beat on Morgan like baby seal, who sat there passively taking every hit.  This was quite a different Piers Morgan who aggressively interviewed Gun Owner’s of America, executive director Larry Pratt, of whom Morgan went after in such a rude and insulting manner as to endure the wrath of many gun owners and conservatives.  He called Pratt stupid to his face.  But with Jones he is very much the gentleman.

Glen Beck’s Rebuttal
Glen Beck, never missing an opportunity to take shots at Alex Jones, went after him the next day on his radio program.  Beck, who insists Jones is too insignificant to be paid attention to, went after Jones in a nasty, rambling, personal attack that should give Jones good ground a deformation lawsuit.  

Here is a brief list of things Beck called Jones:
  • A spooky guy
  • Another Van Jones
  • Not a conservative
  • A dishonest journalist (along with Piers Morgan)
  • A master of deceit
  • an extremist nut job
  • A Fascist
Not to be undone, the worst of the bunch is being called a Fascist.  Which is odd to say the least, as there is no evidence to support such a claim.  It’s nothing but an emotional outburst at this point.  Beck wants his audience to believe that Jones to be a kook, somebody not to be taken seriously, a raving madman, but Beck in his loony outburst could just easily find a room for himself in the same asylum.  To say this attack was “over the top” is an understatement.  It leads me to believe that maybe Jones is correct in that Beck has issues against him–jealously maybe?  Who knows, but it adds to my feelings that something is out of quilter about Glen Beck.  

And Glen Beck was not done.  To try and tarnish Jones’ credibility he went after Jones for reporting on his web sites that the DHS had purchased over a billion rounds of ammunition.  Beck actually doubts such a story.  However, it’s widely reported and the purchase order can be found on a government web site (see links below). It’s apparently a real thing that happened and should be a concern for all citizens of this country.  Beck will have none of it and by doing so, shows a disingenuous side of his character.  Glen Beck, so intent on trashing Jones, never bothered to fact check this affair,  simply ignored the facts and used it as a contrivance to stage his attacks.  And he has the nerve to call other people dishonest?  This shows to what extent he will go to assail an opponent. 

Finally, Glen Beck thinks Morgan gave Jones enough rope to hang himself with, which Morgan also stated, by allowing him to appear as the Bull in the China shop.  Beck also used his web site to further attack Jones the day of, and the day
after his appearance on CNN.

The Bulldog
Alex Jones does take an aggressive tack on everything.  He’s famous for using his bullhorn in public, his version of speaking truth to power.  But he’s also a talk radio pariah.  He’s too far out in Conspiracy Land for the well-known conservative radio hosts to get near.  He’s rarely rates a mention except from Glen Beck who basically slings insults.  Other than Beck, to the best of my knowledge, no mainstream conservative talk radio personality made any reference to Jones taking on Morgan such as he did.  Ironically, most of them use The Drudge Report for show prep and talking points and Jones’ appearance on CNN was documented with multiple links on Drudge’s site.  Anybody else and they would be applauding a good, two-fisted, spirited defense of the 2nd Amendment against a snooty, arrogant, Englishman. 

Did Alex Jones make law abiding gun owners look bad as some say?  It’s hard to tell at this juncture.  I find it amusing that Piers Morgan considers Jones to have a  “level of influence.”  I don't think he does.  There is after all, only one of him displaying this boisterous style.  Remember that Piers Morgan chewed up and spat out other gun right’s advocates and he knew he couldn’t handle Jones that way.  Is Alex Jones for real?  Or controlled opposition?  We shall see in the days ahead.  

Addendum 1/10/13
Glen Beck, who said that Alex Jones was "too insignificant" to trifle with is still after him.  On Beck's radio program this morning he spent a significant amount of time playing clips from Jones' program, picking every goofy thing he could find.  He and his side kicks (who are these guys?) yucked it up mocking Jones.   Beck is turning into a nasty, unlikeable figure in talk radio media.  That man that calls himself a Christian is hardly showing the love of Christ by this outbursts.  Jones is probably right–Beck has a strange obsession with him.  If he really is not important, why carry on like this?

Addendum 1/12/13
Beck still continues to take cheap shots at Alex Jones on his news site, The Blaze.  Once again, if Jones is so insignificant then why go on for so long like this?  Yep, he’s obsessed.  This time it was Jones talking about Beck at the Huffington Post.  There are however, Jones’ fans on there defending him in the comment section.  This could backfire.


Glenn Beck just wants to build dreams cities, like hitler did. They both have models of them. Glenn, Been watching/listening to you for near a decade. You Sir are becoming way too ego centrical. Alex stood upon the ground of the enemy and spoke out like Paul Revere while you and your team hides in the bunker. Yeah, thats right. I saw you on O’Rielly last night. You can’t even leave your studio. You have no boots on the ground. Alex and team send out people with cameras everyday while you guys hide and copy paste drudge postings. I can’t even stand watching you on GBTV anymore because all you talk about is what your going to do like build cities and stuff. Just talk the truth like you use too. Enough with the grand plans of being the media mogul. The fight is now and Alex is doing his part with handy-cams. I’ve seen your rigs you use to broadcast. $100,000 cameras mounted on $40,000 camera cranes. You’re too busy trying to look good than trying to do good. Enough of the Alex bashing and lets get this revolution 2.0 on!

A good point!  At least Jones has reporters on the ground at news events and is doing some hard reporting.  Beck’s news reporting is just gleaming content from around the web and passing it off as news reporting.


Federal Business Opportunities.  PDF of ammo purchase order.

Details of ammo buy.

WND 200,000 more rounds.

Chris Haywood on Alex Jones.

Piers Morgan quote.

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Don’t Get Fooled Again...

Apparently, an easy thing to experience in the Internet Age.

Currently making the rounds is a story that in the Batman: The Dark Knight Rises film, the same film where the tragic shooting occurred in Colorado in the summer of 2012, is a scene where the Police Commissioner character points to map and the words, Sandy Hook, the elementry school where another shocking and deadly shooting occurred is written on the map.  How is that for a strange coincidence?

And it gets even crazier. The next thing reported is that the movie’s property manager Scott Getzinger was from Newtown, the city where the shooting happened.  He was reportedly killed in an automobile accident there in April of 2012. Oh...spooky!  And what does all of this mean?  Nobody ever says.

The trouble with this story is that it’s all bogus.  I have this film on the DVD, the full theatrical release that was manufactured before the tragic Connecticut massacre occurred on December 12, 2012.  This alleged scene does not appear at any time in the movie, and I’ve scanned the film multiple times.  There is no scene of the Police Commissioner looking at a map at any time.  Any map.  Now, a police officer does and you can see the picture above of the map that’s in the film.  Nowhere will you see Sandy Hook printed on that map.

To add to the confusion there is a video on Youtube featuring the map with Sandy Hook written on it.  See the picture of this map below?  It’s not in the movie.  There are other references in this clip to Sandy Hook and they are not in the DVD either.  Perhaps in the Blu-ray version?  I think not.  Both have the same runtime of 165 minutes. I suggest these are prop’s that were never used in the film.  Somebody imaged them for the hoax.  In fact, there is no video online that shows the police commissioner character pointing to a map of any kind.

So what we have here is another Internet hoax or better, a psyop to get the masses distracted.  Some people think the Sandy Hook shooting was a staged event to promote gun control.  So what happens?  Somebody, either on his own or some employees of an agency produces a fake video with clips not seen in the original film.  And, wa-la!  A connection to a far greater plot. Disinformation has its uses you know.

Addendum 1/10/13
Journalist Jon Rappoport is making the rounds with the Sandy Hook hoax. He was on the Clyde Lewis show, Ground Zero tonight.  It’s amazing to me how Rappoport, a journalist with some notable publication credits on his resume can print crap like this on his web site without double-checking sources to begin with.  That’s journalism 101.  He apparently never saw the film.  In fact, one of his sources is an unnamed author on 

Addendum 1/11/13
The YouTube link below has been taken down.

Jon Rappoport

[UPDATE: link taken down] Youtube video supposedly showing Sandy Hook written on a map.  Please note this map is not shown in the theatrical release of the film.

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Marine Writes Open Letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein

Cpl. Joshua Boston, an 8-year Marine veteran has published an excellent, open letter Sen. Dianne Feinstein regarding his Constitutional right to own firearms.

It’s worth a read.

Senator Dianne Feinstein,
I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime.

You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.

I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,

Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps

Amen brother!