MB Hair

Hello, Cybertribe,

Well, it’s the “July 4^th Weekend,” when we celebrate our country’s revolt against the tyrannical rule of King George III of England. What better time for me to post another of my fiery cyber-rants!

ITEM 1: With the massive and un-contained fire raging in Big Sur, California, has anyone heard anything about whether the Esalen Institute is in jeopardy?

==================

ITEM 2: It appears to me that Louis L. Stanton, a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (appointed by Ronald Reagan), just handed over yo Viacom ALL THE PERSONAL DATA of all of us who ever downloaded or watched ANYTHING on YouTube/Amazon. It does not matter whether or not we watched anything illegal, or possibly copyrighted, on YouTube: the order apparently covers ALL of our viewing. This is not only a massive, and I believe, illegal, invasion of our personal privacy, it is also a great marketing information database for Viacom!

So all you hippies out there, who took a peek at the Aquarius tribe performing an excerpt from “HAiR” on the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour, should bear in mind that the show aired on CBS, which is the parent of, and still is closely affiliated with, Viacom. (The chairman and controlling stockholder of BOTH CBS and Viacom is Sumner Redstone (Rothstein.) So, if you hear a knock on your door …

(Incidentally, Viacom’s labels include MTV, Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, Black Entertainment TV, Paramont Pictures, etc.)

Isn’t demanding that you pay someone a sum of money (that you had not previously contracted to pay), to insure that they will not criminally prosecute you, considered criminal extortion? Is Judge Stanton intentionally facilitating such crime?

For those of you who want to read the July 1^st decision of a judge who apparently feels that there is no area of personal privacy that cannot be invaded by a corporation looking to make a buck, here is the link: http://beckermanlegal.com/Documents/viacom_youtube_080702DecisionDiscoveryRulings.pdf

Bow down to Big Brother, thy name is Viacom.

=============

ITEM 3: In another assault on our freedoms, San Diego, California, has announced that, as of this Labor Day, suitable clothing will be mandatory on the heretofore clothing-optional San Onofre State Beach. Nudity has been allowed on this beach for over 40 years, but, as with the world-famous Black’s Beach, which is also in San Diego, nudity will now be illegal. Curiously, I understand that the State of California PERMITS nudity at “designated” beaches and State Parks. To this day, I understand that they have NEVER “designated” a single one!

I don’t know how important this issue seems to most of the Cybertribe, but this action is just one in a long string of losses of freedom in California. Despite the valiant efforts of organizations such as Beachfront USA and others, I have witnessed the loss of one free beach after another. Does anyone else remember the short period when Venice Beach was clothing optional?

Oh, well, at least the theater seems somewhat safe for now, despite the recent activity in prosecuting adult video providers. The youth of today probably would consider it inconceivable for theater to be censored, but I am old enough to remember waiting to be arrested as a MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE of a Living Theater production of “Paradise Now” at the University of Southern California’s Bovard Auditorium. The police had apparently pulled every Police cruiser from miles around to assemble a massive armada of I would estimate more than 50 cars, to surround the auditorium. And what was happening on stage in “Paradise Now”? What I witnessed was just the actors PROTESTING that they were denied the freedom to smoke pot or go naked! At least we are not back to that … yet!

However, like a dormant volcano, there are many laws on the books that are just waiting to re-erupt. The “draft” is one of them: it’s still there, just waiting for the conscription number to be raised above zero.

Another is the dress code. I understand that, in Los Angeles at least, it is illegal for a woman to show ANY PART of her breast below the imaginary line drawn across the top of her areolas? So much for short halter tops, sideless dresses, or even slightly plunging necklines. All they have to do is start enforcing the code.

Dormant draconian laws are not just found in our country. I understand that many of the countries that we Americans consider to have very liberal drug use and sex policies still make these activities illegal. They simply don’t enforce their laws, often blaming “international pressure” for requiring them to keep them on the books.

The above leads me to …

==================

ITEM 4: Beware of the dangerously explosive mixture that results when a government combines detailed information on the lives of its citizens/subjects with a large cache of little known, and poorly understood, but, nevertheless, draconianly repressive, laws. As was probably learned by the East German Stasi (Secret Police), maintaining voluminous, and oft times quite inaccurate, files on every citizen does little to enhance “national security.” Where it is invaluable is as a source for material for either blackmailing specific individuals into silence and submission, locking them away, or “disappearing” them.

Modern computer systems have greatly facilitated searching, and cross-linking the data files, and great improvements were made in data accuracy when the government started utilizing Internet records so that subjects would spy on themselves rather than the government having to rely on second-hand data from “informants.” But this has not greatly improved our “national security.” What it has done is make our lives ever more naked and vulnerable.

Â

Blessed be with peace, love, freedom, and happiness!

John

Â