Saturday, May 25, 2013

Oklahoma relief bill puts America's identity in doubt

Right after the civil war started in Sirya, when casualties among the population began to skyrocket, I posted a comment on the CSIS Facebook page saying that America's intervention in Sirya was a matter of "who we are". 

The day after, President Obama used those very same words in a speech to support America's intervention in the Siryan conflict. 

When I listened to the President's speech I was really excited my own vision on Sirya went through.
The Siryan civil war is really a pointless one, because for the economic interests of a few locals, thousands innocent people lost their lives.  Being America the only Superpower on the planet, it should be able to immediately recognize when the time to act is come. Why America had to act in Sirya? Because it's a matter of values as values represent what we stand for, it's our identity. 

May 20, 2013 A catastrophic tornado tore through the Oklahoma City suburbs, destroying a school and devastating a community.

Republican Senators Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn, have repeatedly voted against funding disaster aid for other parts of the country. They also have opposed increased funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which administers federal disaster relief.

Late last year, Inhofe and Coburn both backed a plan to slash disaster relief to victims of Hurricane Sandy. In a December press release, Coburn complained that the Sandy Relief bill contained "wasteful spending," and identified a series of items he objected to, including "$12.9 billion for future disaster mitigation activities and studies."

When the news hit the public opinion, hundreds of thousands of outraged American citizens sent disgusted messages to the two Republican senators. 

Yesterday, in a meeting with Reporters, House Speaker John Boehner started crying about the Oklahoma disaster. Later that day Boehner said the debate is “healthy” over whether emergency aid for the tornado should require offsets.

Healthy? what does it mean the debate is healthy?

Here's not a matter of healthy debates, when it's about helping fellow American citizens undergoing a major natural disaster it's a matter of who we are, of who is America of what our values are. It's not a matter of money, it must never be when you deal with American citizens who are undergoing a major calamity.

House Speaker Boehner is a very strange man, he cries for any calamity might occur, but when it's time to buckle up and lend a hand to those in need by providing them with federal funds he stops crying and calls the security.

This behavior represents John Boehner's values, that means who is John Boehner, an emotional Republican who denies help to those in need while at the same time he defines himself a patriot by crying at any photo-opportunity. Calling him a hypocrite would be just an euphemism. 

Friday, May 24, 2013

The Google Dictatorship is on

I was writing a post on my blogspot page today and once I was checking the story's format and grammar I saw something weird on the blog's front page, as the "my profile" section went over the article's text for no apparent reason.

So what  I did was clicking over my profile link to see what was wrong with it and you know what happened? I entered a completely new unknown world as with my complete surprise I discovered my personal profile had been transformed into a google plus profile. Who has done it? What happened to my old blogspot profile?

Such a violent takeover from google +  is simply outrageous. My blogspot readers who wanted to see my professional profile are now literally dragged into my new awfully crayola-colored google plus profile.

This is the same mistake that Microsoft did with Windows 8. They try to drive people's will where they want us to go. Are you crazy? How can a giant technological corporation could be so stupid not to understand that the user's will and freedom are holy rights sacred by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? and that they are carved in the marble since more than 60 years?

Are these people completely and absolutely morons? yes they are, because they think we would give up our rights just because this is Internet, a friendly environment where the rights we conquered on the real world simply don't apply here.

These are the kind of initiatives that really make me mad. These people of google they simply don't know anything about history and civil rights and how much humankind fought to conquer them. They don't know what respecting people's freedom means. Where these people come from? They are trampling over our basic civil rights with absolute nonchalance!  Are they a bunch of retarded? No! they're just moved by selfishness, by the will of making profits and in doing so they don't care about the people's free will, they call us "users", or "customers" and users and customers they have no rights, because Internet is not the real world, it's google's world and they rule in here. Dear google, Humankind fought for centuries to conquer its deserved freedom and you can't take that away from us just because Internet is YOUR environment, because Internet is actually OUR Environment and you can't dictate your rules because one day your mood just changed. You can't, you don't and you won't trample over our rights, because before you do that, you have to annihilate our will, you have to fight against our will and if you try, you re going to lose. Nobody has ever succeeded in taking away freedom from humankind. Although it seems you don't know history so well.

Today your profile will be a google+ profile!!! No dude, from today on my profile is always more and more my profile. You are a bunch of idiots who don't know anything about the history of humankind and the fight for freedom which humanity has gone through in the past two thousands years to arrive to what we have today. What you don't understand is by doing so you are indeed destroying yourself, because your "users" behind which there is a human being, they won't allow you to do so. 

It's really incredible how the human race with a single action could be able to delete our freedom, erasing  centuries of fights against the tiranny, and go back to the stone age. We will stop this right now. Google has to change its nazi-dictatorship policy and leave "users", we the people to be free to choose upon our will as stated in the U.S. Constitution and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And I warmly hope this article won't get deleted and my blog shut down because that will be the real step towards the infamy.

E Pluribus Unum

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Smoking Pot will make you skinnier

A study published Wednesday in the American Journal of Medicine claims researchers found lower prevalence rates of obesity and diabetes in people who smoke pot, compared to those who don't.

An earlier research of a 2011 study, showed that marijuana users tend to weigh less and have a lower chance to develop diabetes after scientists decided to examine the drug's impact on insulin and blood sugar levels.

The study's conclusion states that "We found that marijuana use was associated with lower levels of fasting insulin and (insulin resistance), and smaller waist circumference."

An analysis report made by The indicates that  marijuana users also have a higher level of "good cholesterol" known as HDL.

Researchers think marijuana  improves the body's regulation of insulin and think their findings will help explain why pot smokers have a lower incidence of diabetes

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

The Facebook Dictatorship started with the Graph Search

There's no difference between the "virtual" world of Facebook and the physical world our bodies live in. Why? Well simply because today 90% of our social lives take place on the Internet and more than 1 billion people are connected to Facebook so the way this social life is regulated by those who control the virtual space defines the political system we live in. 

Dictatorship is a form of government where the citizens have no rights and there's no freedom.  

Many political regimes of the past they started as Democracy then they became dictatorship. That's what happened to Roma and to Athens for example.

The Soviet regime was based on Marxism and Leninism two political theories that wanted people to believe they would have shared power and responsibilities because the term comes from the Latin word comm┼źnis, that means shared, public, that is owned by everyone but also neutral, unbiased, balanced.

In theory Communism was based on the principle of equality but in the practice of everyday reality this system turned to be a nightmarish dictatorship. Why? because there is no "good powers" when primitive human beings are involved, where primitive means selfish obviously.

Indeed it has been demonstrated by the German based Max Planck institute that in the wild, chimpanzee do not evolve because they are driven by a selfish instinct. In fact evolution is a concept associated with "cooperation" something we should expect from humans. 

The problem with all the dictatorship regime can be found in one single word: "underestimation". At the beginning of every new form of government people tend to be optimistic and see future with hope because that's what the "novelty effect" has on every human being. At the beginning of Fascism, Italian people saw Mussolini as an innovator, someone who cared about social initiatives and his industrial policy could be defined as "visionary".  

This is exactly what's happening with our Computers and the Internet where than four major players are ruling over our lives. We are talking about Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Apple. 

These four entities are in practice ruling our personal and social existence because there's no choice we make today without having to deal with at least one of these four companies. 

The problem is that each of these companies have started to take over our lives in a very invasive fashion. 

Let's start with Facebook, a couple of months ago, Facebook introduced the Graph Search, a new search box that can be installed on your facebook top bar. 

Being a Facebook suggested technical improvement I decided to install it and I couldn't had imagined what kind of nightmare I was going through. 

For those who ignore what I am talking about, I can tell you that the Facebook Search Graph can be summarized in two words: SUGGESTED CHOICES. 

This is a screenshot of the new Facebook Search Graph

If you take a look at it, you can see that your possible search options are LIMITED by what Facebook wants you to look into. Once you get into the search box this fucking drop down menu pops up. 

Just to make an example none of these choices include the FACEBOOK PAGES that just by chance is the ONLY thing I look for when I use the Facebook search bar. However even if you look for social pages you just have to digit the name of the page you are looking for and the drop down menu shows some results, it doesn't show you ALL the results possible of the existing pages with the name you are looking for. 
What this all means? Well this means that the Facebook Team doesn't care if you only care for Social Pages, they don't want you to be FREE to have as many options as possible they want you to have the options THEY think you must have. 

Let's examine the options of the drop down menu: 1) My Friends. Personally I NEVER search for friends, in case I am looking for someone I look for someone I don't know so the first option for me is just something that shouldn't be there. 

2) Photos of my friends. Photos of my friends? I don't fucking care about the photos of my friends, I personally unsubscribed from all of my friends news because I am not staying on Facebook to see Jane Doe's dog pictures, nor of John Doe's football dinner. I don't care! I stay on Facebook to read the news, to write crucial comments to the bullshits that News Media write every single day and to post relevant news on my Social Page. That's what I do on Facebook.

3) Restaurant Nearby. Why in the world a mentally healthy person would search for a restaurant on Facebook? I am from Italy and I personally have a cooking page, I love restaurants and certainly I would never rely on Facebook to know where's the nearest Restaurant. I would use Google for that function and however that's a function for Mobile users who don't have any idea about where they are because are probably drunk. And that's not my case. So the third option is absolutely useless for me. 

4) Games my friends play. Do I seriously have to talk about this? Games my friends play? I don't have friends and I don't play games On-line, I play Basketball for real in the park nearby my home. 

5) Music my friends like. Did I just wrote that? Music my friends like? I don't care about my friends music they're tasteless motherfuckers, why I should look for something so weird and stupid like that? Do you think that's something worth for suggestion in the first 5 option of the first Social Network of the World? This thing goes worse and worse 

6) Photos I have liked. Photos I have liked? I would really like to know what's the mental process these people followed to write such a list of total nonsense. Do you think I go On-line to see pictures I have liked? That's something that belongs to the PAST. The past does not exist, it's something that make people nostalgic and consequently DEPRESSED.Why in the world I should look for something so weird? 

7) Groups my friends are in. This clearly shows what a follower personality the author of this drop-down menu should be. My friends do not exist! I am free, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly stated that every human being on this planet is FREE and is granted Universal Freedom. Why in the world I should follow someone else social life. This is the whole principle that is completely wrong, because this drop-down menu gives you the idea of the concept these sick people have of the NEW world. They think I should do what my friends do. Like if I am a sheep and I do not know where to go or what to do or what my social attitudes are. Do you think that's the social model of the new millennium? To make people slaves of what their friends do? Are you totally retarded? I have no words to express my indignation about the social model these people are providing with such an important drop-down menu. Through this drop-down menu Facebook shows the world what their VALUES are. From a software that changed the way people interact each other I would expect something on a higher level sweetie pie!

However also under a technical point of view the original search box provides the user with a huger amount of results when you search for social pages respect to the damn Graph Search. So if the great original Search Box is way better than the new but lame Graph Search why you have to change for worse?

At present the Graph Search is optional but once you installed it there's no chance you can remove it. Even if if you go to your Account Settings and switch your language from English (US) to English (UK) you can restore the original search bar, although that's a provisional choice because willing or not the Graph Search is here to stay indeed:

The Facebook team communicated through its representatives that: 

"While there may be temporary workarounds to remove yourself from Graph Search, eventually everyone on Facebook will have Graph Search."

"Everyone on Facebook will have Graph Search!"

This is an order: Everyone will have Graph Search. Why? Because we the Facebook Team, a bunch of nerdy retarded with absolutely no experience of consciousness travelling we decided so. 

None of the 1 billion Facebook users has been invited to express his/her opinion if this Graph Search was something we would like to have it or not on our Facebook page.

Do you think it would be impossible for The Facebook Team to call people to vote for or against the installing of a Graph Search?  

At least they could give every user the chance to choose what categories of search would pop up on the drop-down menu of the Graph Search. 


Facebook wants you to look for Games my friends play. 

Not only is a dictatorship, is the dictatorship of stupidity. When I wrote the movie Idiocracy is what we have to expect from our future world, I wasn't joking. This is one of the many examples that confirm you that's the direction our world has taken. 

In any case what really is my major cause of worry is the fact these giant companies are trying to address our everyday choices and even if they would never manage to drive us where they want us to go to, they make us waste a lot of our precious time. 

Two weeks ago I bought an Acer Netbook with Windows 8 in it. Since I started using the computer there was no choice I have made while using it that wasn't driven by the Microsoft Corporation.

The problem is the computer is set in a way which does not allow the user to have access to certain functions of it if you don't have a account.

-You can't set up the Operative System and you can't even log into the computer if you don't have a account.

- You can't set up the Mail software if you don't use a account

- You can't use the Skydrive software if you don't have a account

When you open a video file of your choice, a menu of film choices pop up and I don't have the slightest idea where these movie titles come from. In addition it's in practice impossible to get out from that page. 

These people want us to make their choices- THEY WANT US TO DO WHAT THEY WANT, they want  us to do what they decided for us. That's the reality at this time and it's not something we can dismiss just like this as a minor detail. This is something that will affect our lives because they keep SUGGESTING us what to do without leaving us the possibility to choose what we want to do.

There would be thousands of things to say about how Fecebook as well as other New Technological companies takes their decisions in a narcissistic way without taking into consideration the user because for them the user just does not exist.

The Facebook Team has received a number of messages from Facebook Users who don't want the new Graph Search. A real Forum started from the question a user posted on the Facebook Help Forum: "How do I remove Graph Search?" I warmly invite you to read all the comments people wrote about here on the Facebook forum:

Please take notice that the Facebook Forum is so democratic that users are not allowed to post external links into their comments. This is the Facebook Democracy!

Some of the comments posted in the forum are really meaningful: Vladimir Byazrov writes: "This graph search works like sht, slows down fb and makes my browsers hardly usable. please, Mark, stop creating sht. We love simple things"


That's the keyword that none of these giant companies still understood. While using technology that is already something unnatural for human beings, you the software developer you have to understand you are building something that Human Beings are going to use and if you still haven't got it, human beings love SIMPLE THINGS. WE LOVE SIMPLE. On the contrary these developers who are less and less human because the job they chose and their forma mentis, they keep proposing models which are absolutely artificial, unnatural and against the human being.

What we need is a Software Renaissance where the human being is brought back at the center of the world, like in the Italian Renaissance, when the architecture focused back on the human scale and cities, town, villages, streets and squares started to be built with the human form in mind.

Software is architecture so it shouldn't be difficult for these nerds to grab this simple concept: Simple things shaped upon the human being necessities. Nothing exotic, just very simple things based on the principle of simplicity, user-friendly and most of all on Freedom, the mother of all human needs.

Despite the incredible number of requests on the Facebook forum to remove the Graph Search, the Facebook Team replied that Everyone will have the Graph Search.

The Facebook statement was signed by someone who signed him/herself just like Pat. 

So I decided to reply to Pat with this message:

Dear PAT you already said that! Your answer look like a paranormal residual activity, it's like a recording tape, it will play the events over and over again. 
Do you realize your Customer Service really sucks? Why your assistance level is so low with all the money that Facebook has? Can you please explain? Do you realize that the Graph search is something people hate? Do you know WHY we, the people we hate the Graph Search?
I ll tell you why and please take notice for your marketing Department and mostly for your R&D Department: We hate it because we the people we hate being addressed on how to organize our stuff while using the Internet
Do you realize you are doing the same mistakes that both Microsoft and Google are doing with their "suggestions"?
You are just doing the same mistakes they did by trying to address people in their choices and that's a thing
that many dictators and political regimes have been trying in the past and at the end of the day they all have
been removed by the people itself.
Because it does not matter if this is the virtual world, there's no difference for us, we want to be free!

People has the right to be free, our choices cannot be addressed in any way or form because we live in a free world and we were all born free.
If you try to limit our Freedom you are acting like a non-democratic dictator.
Do you understand that? Every man was born free, please take notice while you nerds program a software that is going to be used by real free human beings.

Please take notice that you cannot address our choices, nor you can try to limit our freedom because we the people are going to go against you and your organization because Freedom is a Universal value and no dictator has ever won his battle against the will of people to be free.

E Pluribus Unum

Friday, May 10, 2013

The Watergate was an Intelligence operation to get rid of Richard Nixon

We are used to think the Watergate scandal as a landmark of American democracy.

That's because two simple American journalists found out the truth behind the June 17, 1972, break-in at the Democratic National Committee and about the Nixon administration's attempted cover-up of its involvement.

Although you the reader, you don't know anything about the real story behind the Watergate.

Before becoming a "journalist", Robert Upshur “Bob” Woodward was a former Naval Intelligence Officer, who worked at the ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence).

While in the Naval Intelligence, (the oldest and most prestigious U.S. Intelligence unit) Bob Woodward was the briefing officer for Admiral Thomas Hinman Moorer, who during the Watergate scandal happened  to be (just by chance) the Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Just by chance Admiral Moorer was the Military Officer who authorized his subordinates to spy on the White House´s National Security Counsel during the Watergate investigations.....because nor the District of Columbia Police, nor the FBI have enough jurisdiction to spy on the White House or on any other US Government body. The order has to come and be constantly supervised from the highest ranking U.S. Military Officer, which usually is the Head of the Joint Chief of Staff.

Bob Woodward during the Watergate investigation was fed by deep throat, aka FBI Associate Director Mark Felt.

Woodward's supervisor was Ben Bradlee, a former Naval Intelligence Officer and CIA propaganda officer. He received his naval commission two hours after graduating in 1942, joined the Office of Naval Intelligence and worked as a communications officer in the Pacific during World War II.
His duties included handling classified and coded cables.

In 1952, during his service in the CIA, Ben Bradlee joined the staff of the Office of U.S. Information and Educational Exchange (USIE) the embassy's propaganda unit. USIE produced films, magazines, research, speeches, and news items for use by the CIA throughout Europe. USIE (later known as USIA) also controlled the Voice of America, a means of disseminating pro-American "cultural information" worldwide. While at the USIE, according to a Justice Department memo from an assistant U.S. attorney in the Rosenberg Trial, Bradlee was helping the CIA manage European propaganda regarding the spying conviction and execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg on June 19, 1953.

Do I have to go on?

In practice the FBI (deep throat) provided the Naval Intelligence (Bob Woodward) with crucial information about a series of crimes perpetrated by the incumbent POTUS, all this happened under the supervision of the CIA (Ben Bradlee).

I provide you with another little detail: How the criminal investigation led  the detectives from the Watergate Burglars to the White House? Thanks to a note they found on one of the burglars shirt's pocket: Eugenio R. Martinez, in the note there was the White House phone number of Howard E. Hunt.

Eugenio Martinez was a Cuban CIA asset and while on duty he certainly wasn't used to go around with notes in his pocket with phone numbers of his CIA Supervising Officer who just by chance in that period was also working for the White House.

How did Howard Hunt came to work for the White House? Because of CIA Director Richard Helms who taking as excuse the leak of the Pentagon Papers, he felt more "secure" with Howard Hunt at the White House.............................

Adopting a metaphor, Richard Helms was the real writer who wrote the Watergate story, there was obviously a publisher of the story, probably a company or more than one, but that would be too much for us, we are not skilled enough to guess who was the story publisher, let's be happy enough with the fact we know there's another story behind the official one.

In practice the Watergate was a smooth way to get rid of Richard Nixon through a news show run by the United States Intelligence.

The story also helped the world's audience to believe that the Free Press in the Free Democratic World can help discover a corrupted government and get rid of it. We can affirm without a doubt that whoever was the Intelligence Publisher of this story was a real master because the Watergate story is an Intelligence Masterpiece which I would define as an Art Masterpiece.

Today the same thing is happening with these Wikileaks files. Same method just with different actors, but the story is just the same: Wikileaks is a tool used by the US Government to deliver a message from an unofficial source, in order to have a story that sounds credible and objective because it comes from a third party.

E Pluribus Unum

American Injustice: In the State of Connecticut Double jeopardy doesn't apply

   Senior Assistant State's Attorney Paul Ferencek at the murder trial of Carlos Trujllo, at state Superior   
   Court in Stamford on Wednesday, Dec. 1, 2010. Photo: Helen Neafsey

Double jeopardy is a legal provision that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges following a legitimate acquittal or conviction. This provision is based on the Roman Law principle "Ne bis in idem" which translates literally from Latin as "not twice in the same person"

This two thousands years old provision doesn't apply in the State of Connecticut, where a Legal Genius: Paul Ferencek Senior Assistant State's Attorney, he thought  it would be fine to prosecute Colombian born Carlos Trujillo for the murder of his boss: Con Artist/Ponzi Scheme fraudster Andrew Kissel

The problem is Carlos Trujillo was charged with two counts: murder and attempted murder.

The story premise is: How can you prosecute a defendant under the American Law for murder and attempted murder of the same victim at the same time? Let's see it:

Andrew Kissel was an American former real estate developer who was found murdered at his rented Greenwich, Connecticut estate. Kissel had been accused of defrauding a New York co-op board of millions of dollars. His body was found by workers from a moving company. He had been stabbed to death in the basement of the home. The motive for his murder was a mystery and it's still a mystery, as there were many people who had problems with him, including those from the U.S. Justice Department, several multi-billion dollar corporations/conglomerates, some unknown New Jersey investors which included some of his relatives and his own wife.

Usually in a murder investigation, the first Person of Interest to those who are supposed to investigate is the victim's spouse.Three years before the murder of Andrew Kissel, his brother Robert was murdered by his wife Nancy in their apartment in Hong Kong. For sure there was something wrong about the Kissels that made their loved ones mad about.

Indeed Andrew Kissel's wife had filed for divorce a year before his murder, and at the time of the murder they shared the same house but they were in the process to move out of their Greenwich CT home because she asked the Court to remove him from the house as at the time of the murder she was totally fed up with him. The moving men overheard the Kissels having a heated argument days before the murder, a fact that could attest to her feelings about Andrew.

In a revealing email message that Hayley Kissel had sent to her sister-in-law, Jane, Hayley vented her frustrations. "GOD I HATE YOUR BROTHER," 
In that same email Hayley wrote "Do you know last night in bed, I could actually see myself pummeling him to death and just enjoying the sensation of each and every shot and then this morning as I pulled out of the garage... all I wanted to do was crash into his Ferraris." In the email she characterized her husband as "an awful awful pathetic person."

But despite all the evidence of her hatred for her husband would had lead towards that direction even a blind, authorities have not pursued Andrew Kissel's wife as a suspect.


Because the victim's wife was nothing less than  Hayley Wolff, whose father is CEO of  The Louis Berger Group a $2 billion group that currently ranks as the third largest USAID private sector partner which has contracted some of the government’s largest post-conflict redevelopment projects in Iraq and Afghanistan. Too much for the Greenwich Police Department and for the Senior Assistant Paul Ferencek, although they had to find someone to impersonate the guilty murderer.

Having potentially an infinite number of suspects and an enormous pressure from the media, after one year of investigations that led them nowhere,  the State of Connecticut made its move.

Greenwich Police Chief James Walters, detectives Pasquale Iorfino and Timothy Powell of the Greenwich Police Department under the superior leadership of legal genius Senior Assistant State's Attorney Paul Ferencek decided to head towards the easiest way out and go for the victim's driver: Carlos Trujillo, a Colombian born who was the only person who actually cared for the victim.

Nobody would care less about the Colombian driver, in America the prosecution machine works this way: if you can't find who has done the crime, just charge someone who can impersonate the guilty so that the Public Opinion is happy, the victim's family is happy and the Prosecutor's political voters are all happy because they have the perception that justice has been served as someone is in jail. It doesn't matter if he's guilty or innocent. Someone has to pay for this crime because otherwise people are not happy and happiness is our God here in America.

During the trial, Attorney Lindy Urso, who represents Carlos Trujillo,asked lead Detective Pasquale Iorfino, of the Greenwich Police Department, how thoroughly his team investigated a group of nearly 30 people who Kissel defrauded. "Some of the individuals were defrauded of up to a half a million dollars," Urso said. "Did you speak to any of these people about any connection to the homicide?"Iorfino said he only spoke with Kissel's mother-in-law, who had lost money in the real estate scam. "I'm not too sure how many of these people knew he was home alone that weekend," Iorfino said.

Obviously the jury  aquitted Trujllo for the murder of Andrew Kissel, but the State of Connecticut under the legal genius guide of Senior Assistant State's Attorney Paul Ferencek had charged Carlos Trujillo also for attempted murder and here's the greatness of the American legal system. How can it possibly happen that a defendant is acquitted of murder but indicted and eventually convicted for attempted murder of the same victim? It is at least confusing how someone can attempt murder when murder actually has happened!

How can the American legal system and in particular the Connecticut Legal system tolerate such an asinine,  dumb, foolish, harebrained,  imbecilic, insane, moronic, silly, unintelligent legal contradiction?

Superior Court Judge Richard F. Comerford Jr allowed the two counts of murder and attempted murder, so if a Court Judge allows the prosecutor to present the two counts, that means the Connecticut Law goes against the legal principle of Ne Bis in Idem or Double Jeopardy as it's called in America.

Eventually during the trial, prosecutors even said that they do not know who actually killed Andrew Kissel, but believed Trujillo was involved as an accessory.

After such an amount of stupidity and dumbness of the Greenwich Police Department and of the Prosecutor, how can you possibly trust the Connecticut Legal system and consequently the American legal system?

The United States Law gives the Judge the faculty to allow the prosecution of a circumstantial case when the evidence is enough solid to prove the defendant he's guilty although in any proceedings the court may refuse to allow evidence.

In one of the landmark cases about Evidence Admission, specifically Taylor Weaver and Donovan (1928), the Lord Chief Justice Gordon Hewart, observed that:  

It is evidence of surrounding circumstances which, by undesigned coincidence, is capable of proving a proposition with the accuracy of mathematics. 

In State of Connecticut vs. Carlos Trujillo, the accuracy was the same of the dancing elephant in a crystal shop. Not only the Trujillo case was absolutely "circumstantial" (by using an euphemism) which was eventually acknowledged by the Jury, but the Prosecutor had the impudence of defying the Double Jeopardy rule and charge the defendant with murder and attempted murder at the same time. How can a Professional Lawyer who went to an Ivy League University make such an offensive statement against not only the American Legal system but the whole Western Legal tradition?

These are the actions that go against the Western Tradition and bring not only America but humankind back to the primitive world of the Wild Jungle.

A savage primitive man like Paul Ferencek should not be conceded to enter a Court nor to be called a "lawyer", because lawyer is someone who knows the Law and respect its principles. All of them.

Paul Ferencek is a primitive wild man who tries to destroy not only the American Legal system but the whole Western legal tradition. How can the State of Connecticut allow such a legal havoc?

Certainly part of the problem about the American Injustice lies on the fact that the Public Prosecutor is a Political figure who is elected by the people and as such he's influenced by the Political spectrum, by the political pressures and consequently by the media.

Certainly this kind of system goes against the weak side of the society, those like Carlos Trujillo who are the weak side of the social spectrum and they are unable to defend themselves.

Even if Carlos Trujillo has pleaded guilty of attempted murder and at this time he's probably free and back to Colombia (where I suggest him to stay) I think his lawyer should start think about a civil action against the State of Connecticut for wrongful conviction, because these kind of things should never happen and in order to serve justice, those who are responsible for these legal atrocities should be punished without pity, starting from the Prosecutor Mr. Paul Ferencek, a man who clearly made a statement to destroy the Western Legal System.

Shame on the State of Connecticut!

E Pluribus Unum

Gianluca D'Agostino

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

God save David Cameron!

    The Dalai Lama with British Prime Minister David Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg     
      Photo: Clifford Shirley

A month has passed since the death of Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, although it seems her "iron-energy" still  flutters within the rooms of number 10.

Here's the story: The government of China wants Mr Cameron to apologize for hosting Tibet’s spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, who disputes Beijing’s territorial claims on the region. 

The British Government insists there is nothing to apologize for.

Sebastian Wood, Britain’s ambassador in Beijing, was summoned to the foreign ministry to receive a rebuke from China’s vice-foreign minister Mr. Sang Tao. The foreign ministry said the meeting with the exiled Tibetan leader had “seriously interfered with China’s internal affairs”. Mr Song urged Britain to take “practical actions to correct the error”.

However, the pleas were ignored, and China is now exerting public pressure on the Government to bow to its demands and make amends.

The standoff has frozen diplomatic relations between the two countries and it could put at risk Chinese investment in Britain, which was worth £8 billion last year.

In today's world where everything is based upon the concept of business and profitability, Mr. David Cameron's position can be defined as more unique than rare. 

Indeed David Cameron's firm position towards the Chinese government's request for an apology reminds me  of those great British leaders of the past like Winston Churchill or Mrs.Thatcher, who in the best British tradition they held firm positions when it's a matter of principle. Great Britain never took orders from anyone, (except maybe in the decade 1997/2007).

Here the principle is Tibet has the right to exist as an autonomous state, according to the most basic principle of a thing called Democracy, which is based upon the right of nations to self-determination, which is the cardinal principle in modern international law.

Great Britain is the cradle of Democracy, China is a political regime which still denies to its citizens the most basic human rights and freedoms. David Cameron's position, which only apparently and for short-sighted observers goes against the very same economic interests of Great Britain, should instead be taken as an example of government virtue by all the world's governments. Because in a time when only economic interest and business opportunities lead government choices, Mr. Cameron firm position, represents the direction where the world must turn to.

Besides, everybody knows that China needs Britain way more than the contrary, the evidence is the fact that China's diplomatic machine is working to restore good relations with Britain as soon as possible.

Being these the facts, the PM's position clearly shows that my personal motto reveals to be true:
"power is of whom exercises it".

David Cameron's show of force is a real sign of hope for the whole world, hope that we have a real chance to change the world for the better, than we can change the bad and the ugly to good and beautiful, we just need strong leaders like David Cameron.

The people of Great Britain should fully support his leader for such a demonstration of courage, mostly because his position reflects Democracy at its best, in a time of spiritual aridity, David Cameron is the rainbow that leads the way not only for Great Britain and the Western world, but for humankind as a whole.

God save David Cameron!