THE SOTOMAYOR SCARE

By Chuck Baldwin’s Son: Timothy Baldwin
August 21, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

[Note: My son, Tim, writes today’s column. He is an attorney who received his Juris Doctor degree from Cumberland School of Law in Birmingham, Alabama. He is a former prosecutor for the Florida State Attorney’s Office and now owns his own private law practice. He is author of a new book, published soon by Agrapha Publishing, entitled FREEDOM FOR A CHANGE.]

Yes, yes, we have all heard the remarks from those who would call themselves conservative, libertarian or the like concerning the nomination and now swearing-in of Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court, which took place on August 8, 2009. Yes, yes, books have been written by those conservative and libertarian editorialists and authors who have explained to us that the United States Supreme Court (US S CT) is “out of control” and how we must elect “conservative” Presidents to appoint “conservative” judges. Ironically, this infatuation with the federal government, and specifically with the judicial branch of the federal government, has actually (at least in part) created the growing enslavement of the people of these States United.

Certainly we should care about who sits on the US S CT bench. However, the time has come in our Confederate Republic (the USA) to acknowledge and understand that the power to govern ourselves justly and constitutionally is in the hands of the people of the several states of America–NOT in the hands of the branches of federal government. What most people in America have been duped to believe is that the US S CT is the final arbiter in all matters concerning government actions related to the US Constitution.

When it comes to US S CT rulings that contradict the US Constitution and that reject the historical facts and principles of our Republic, people feel hopeless and think that regaining freedom somehow means replacing the “liberal” judges with “conservative” judges. Such an approach to preserving freedom is not only un-American; it is fruitless and ineffectual. History now proves this. Additionally, this approach proves that the vast majority of Americans have been indoctrinated into the centralist-ideology imposed on us by not-so-innocent advocates of such a political belief system.

Let me state this clearly: the US Constitution does not grant to the US S CT the power to interpret the Constitution in contradiction to the terms of the Constitution, and it does not strip the powers of the States to actively arrest and resist tyrannical federal actions. The US S CT can no more violate the Constitution than the Legislative and Executive branches can. What sense does it make that the US S CT is bound by an oath to support and defend the Constitution and then has the power to interpret it however the heck they want to? Do you think our founders were so near-sighted and unlearned that they would have given to the US S CT this unchecked and unlimited power in the very document that states its purpose is “to secure the blessings of liberty”?

The framework of our Confederate Republic was clearly understood by those who advocated its ratification, namely, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay: the writers of the Federalist Papers. These are the men who some today would argue advocated for a centralist government, reducing and eliminating the power of the States to resist and arrest federal usurpation of power. Obviously, these advocates of centralism would not have you aware of what these founders said on the subject, nor would they like to admit that the US Constitution formed a league of states, which was acceded to by each independent and sovereign act of the states, and which secured the right and duty of the states to actively guard against the encroachments of the federal government they created for the security of the blessings of liberty.

It must first be admitted that the US Constitution never gave to the US S CT the power to substitute their will for the intentions of the Founders of the Constitution. This is easy to prove. Alexander Hamilton admits this in Federalist Paper 78:

“It can be of no weight to say that the courts, on the pretense of a repugnancy, may substitute their own pleasure to the constitutional intentions of the legislature . . . The courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise WILL instead of JUDGMENT, the consequence would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body.”

Here, Hamilton points out the fact that, in our Confederate Republic, the US S CT MUST apply the Constitution to all federal laws as intended by the Founders. They are NOT to place their will above the will of those who framed and acceded to the US Constitution. To suggest that the US S CT has the power to alter, change or amend the Constitution at will is to place the US S CT above the Constitution: they can no more do this than the legislative branch can pass an unconstitutional law and the executive branch can carry out an unconstitutional law. Or as Hamilton puts it, putting their will above the Constitution will “equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body.” Neither is acceptable and neither is constitutional.

One cannot credibly and correctly argue that whatever the US S CT says goes. I should not even have to restate this maxim, but in America, it has been held true that any unconstitutional act is null and void. This applies to the US S CT as well. Thus, the question becomes, what can and what must the states do when all three branches of the federal government ignore the Constitution and trample over the intents of its foundational principles? The authors of the Federalist Papers give us some guidance on the subject.

In Federalist Paper 16, Hamilton explains in detail the states’ right to actively resist federal tyranny and usurpation of power. Listen to Hamilton:

“The plausibility of this objection [that the states will at any time obstruct the execution of federal laws] will vanish the moment we advert to the essential difference between a mere NON-COMPLIANCE and a DIRECT and ACTIVE RESISTANCE. If the interposition of the State legislatures be necessary to give effect to a measure of the Union, they have only NOT TO ACT, or to ACT EVASIVELY, and the measure is defeated. This neglect of duty may be disguised under affected but unsubstantial provisions, so as not to appear, and of course not to excite any alarm in the people for the safety of the Constitution. The State leaders may even make a merit of their surreptitious invasions of it on the ground of some temporary convenience, exemption, or advantage.

Advertisement

“But if the execution of the laws of the national government should not require the intervention of the State legislatures, if they were to pass into immediate operation upon the citizens themselves, the particular governments could not interrupt their progress without an open and violent exertion of an unconstitutional power. No omissions nor evasions would answer the end. They would be obliged to act, and in such a manner as would leave no doubt that they had encroached on the national rights . . . Attempts of this kind would not often be made with levity or rashness, because they could seldom be made without danger to the authors, UNLESS IN CASES OF A TYRANNICAL EXERCISE OF THE FEDERAL AUTHORITY.” (Emphasis added.)

Here, Hamilton clearly recognizes the states’ ability to actively intervene against the federal government “in cases of a tyrannical exercise of the federal authority.” Hamilton also expounds upon the natural protection that the new system of the US Constitution provides, in that states will not so easily and readily interfere with federal action when such interference must be made actively and openly against the federal government. Certainly, where at least three-fourths (the percentage needed to amend the Constitution) of the states disagree with the State actively resisting the federal government, that State will consider the risks and costs to be too great to carry out and thus would not resist actively; instead, that State would use its VOICE and not its ARM to communicate its discontent. However, as told by Hamilton, “IN CASES OF A TYRANNICAL EXERCISE OF THE FEDERAL AUTHORITY,” the states most certainly would use their ARM to arrest such tyrannical actions.

Hamilton describes the use of this ARM of the States in Federalist Paper 26:

“[T]he State legislatures, WHO WILL ALWAYS BE NOT ONLY VIGILANT BUT SUSPICIOUS AND JEALOUS GUARDIANS OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS AGAINST ENCROACHMENTS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the VOICE, but, if necessary, the ARM of their discontent . . . “[T]he people should resolve to recall all the powers they have heretofore parted with out of their own hands, and to divide themselves into as many States as there are counties, in order that they may be able to manage their own concerns in person.” (Emphasis added.)

Hamilton goes so far as to say, if the federal government has usurped its powers and the people of the states feel it necessary, the states should secede from the union, dividing “themselves into as many states as there are counties, in order that they may be able to manage their own concerns in person.” This is not I stating this: this is one of the most well-known Founding Fathers in American history. Hamilton further expounds upon this states’ right and duty to check federal usurpation of power in Federalist Paper 28. He says,

“Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and THESE [THE STATES] WILL HAVE THE SAME DISPOSITION TOWARDS THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. IF THEIR RIGHTS ARE INVADED BY EITHER, THEY CAN MAKE USE OF THE OTHER AS THE INSTRUMENT OF REDRESS. How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized!” (Emphasis added.)

Very clearly, Hamilton sees the brilliance of our Confederate Republic system of government, whereby the states can check the federal government and that where “rights are invaded” by the federal government, the people “can make use of the [states] as the instrument of redress.” Hamilton continues in this discussion, saying:

“It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that THE STATE GOVERNMENTS WILL, IN ALL POSSIBLE CONTINGENCIES, AFFORD COMPLETE SECURITY AGAINST INVASIONS OF THE PUBLIC LIBERTY BY THE NATIONAL AUTHORITY. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, THEY CAN AT ONCE ADOPT A REGULAR PLAN OF OPPOSITION, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different States, and UNITE THEIR COMMON FORCES FOR THE PROTECTION OF THEIR COMMON LIBERTY.” (Emphasis added.)

Even as expressed by the centralists’ hero, Alexander Hamilton, the states were not left impotent regarding federal tyranny and were not stuck with the fruitless redress only through the US S CT. Hamilton clearly suggests that the states have the sovereign and active power to arrest the exercise of federal tyranny.

Again, the question here is not, does the federal government have the power to act within its delegated powers, for we all would concede that the federal government has the power to do what we the people in the several states delegated to the federal government. We acknowledge, as Hamilton expresses in Federalist Paper 27, “the laws of the Confederacy, as to the ENUMERATED and LEGITIMATE objects of its jurisdiction, will become the SUPREME LAW of the land.” Rather, the question is, what are the states going to do in response to the usurpation of powers that have been tyrannically taken by all three branches of the federal government? The question is, what are the states going to do when the federal government has passed, upheld and executed laws that are not “enumerated and legitimate objects of its jurisdiction”? After all, such laws are by definition NOT the supreme laws of the land and consequently, the people of the states and the states themselves are not bound to them. (Of course, this necessarily implies that we the people understand the Constitution, the principles of our government and the true character and nature of our government.)

Are the people of the states to sit back and let the federal government trample over the rights, principles and structure of our Confederate Republic? Is every State to shirk its responsibilities and duties to actively protect, preserve and defend the freedoms of its sovereign (the people of the State) against federal tyranny? Are the people of the states to live and be governed in tyranny with the only hope that we will hopefully elect a President who will hopefully appoint a US S CT justice to the bench so that the Court can hopefully hear a case on the direct issue so that the Court will hopefully rule the correct way? Nonsense!

The time has come that the people of the several states of America wake up to the truth of their history: they are citizens of independent and sovereign states; the US S CT is NOT the final arbiter in matters of freedom; the federal government is not the source of our freedom; the states have the duty to resist the encroachments of federal usurpation; and freedom can be restored when the Confederate Republic is restored. To that end, we must not fear Sotamayor; rather, we should insist that she fear the states–and obey the Constitution!

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2009 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved

E-mail This Page

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

---

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence. 

Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, “Chuck Baldwin Live” This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet http://www.ChuckBaldwinLive.com and newspapers.  

To learn more about his radio talk show please visit his web site at: www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

The Hidden Agenda: The Flouride Deception

DR. Monteith goes over the history of fluoride, its use, its dangers and its promotion over time. Why something that is rejected by so many nations is promoted here in the USA. Learn about the Hidden Agenda behind the use of Fluoride, who’s behind it and the real purpose behind its use. Shocking video

 

Bob Chapman on Alex Jones Tv :Where do we go from Here?

Activist Alan Keyes on Alex Jones Tv 1/5:Obama’s Chavez Like Socialism For America!!

Alex welcomes to the show conservative political activist, author, former diplomat, and presidential candidate Alan Keyes. In May, Keyes was arrested with other pro-life activists prior to Obama’s commencement speech at Notre Dame. Keyes also contests Obama’s eligibility to be president on the birth issue.

 

The Infowarrior with Jason Bermas: Bohemian Grove Special 1/4

‘Uh-Oh They’re Here’

A persistent blogger annoys police — and winds up in jail.

Monday, August 10, 2009

A 34-YEAR-OLD woman, the mother of a 12-year-old girl, has been locked up in a Virginia jail for three weeks and could remain there for at least another month. Her crime? Blogging about the police.

Elisha Strom, who appears unable to make the $750 bail, was arrested outside Charlottesville on July 16 when police raided her house, confiscating notebooks, computers and camera equipment. Although the Charlottesville police chief, Timothy J. Longo Sr., had previously written to Ms. Strom warning her that her blog posts were interfering with the work of a local drug enforcement task force, she was not charged with obstruction of justice or any similar offense. Rather, she was indicted on a single count of identifying a police officer with intent to harass, a felony under state law.

It’s fair to say that Ms. Strom was unusually focused on the Jefferson Area Drug Enforcement task force, a 14-year-old unit drawn mainly from the police departments of Charlottesville, Albemarle County and the University of Virginia. (Her blog at http://iheartejade.blogspot.com, expresses the view that the task force is “nothing more than a group of arrogant thugs.”) In a nearly year-long barrage of blog posts, she published snapshots she took in public of many or most of the task force’s officers; detailed their comings and goings by following them in her car; mused about their habits and looks; hinted that she may have had a personal relationship with one of them; and, in one instance, reported that she had tipped off a local newspaper about their movements.

Predictably, this annoyed law enforcement officials, who, it’s fair to guess, comprised much of her readership before her arrest. But what seems to have sent them over the edge — and skewed their judgment — is Ms. Strom’s decision to post the name and address of one of the officers with a street-view photo of his house.

All this information was publicly available, including the photograph, which Ms. Strom gleaned from municipal records. The task force’s officers may have worked undercover on occasion, but one wonders about their undercover abilities, given that Ms. Strom was able to out them so consistently. Chief Longo warned Ms. Strom that her blog posts were scaring off informants and endangering the officers and their families, but he provided no evidence. At no point did Ms. Strom’s blog express a threat, explicit or otherwise, to police or their sources.

Ms. Strom is not the most sympathetic symbol of free-speech rights. She has previously advocated creating a separate, all-white nation, and her blog veers from the whimsical to the self-righteous to the bizarre. But the real problem here is the Virginia statute, in which an overly broad, ill-defined ban on harassment-by-identification, specifically in regard to police officers, seems to criminalize just about anything that might irritate targets.

It should not be a crime to annoy the cops, whose raid on Ms. Strom’s house looks more like a fit of pique than an act of law enforcement. Some of her postings may have consisted of obnoxious speech, but they were nonetheless speech and constitutionally protected. That would hold true right up through her last blog post, written as the police raid on her home began at 7 a.m.: “Uh-Oh They’re Here.”

Pre-Paid Legal Services: 36 Years and Counting

PPD Plans Marketing Re-Launch in Las Vegas in September

ADA, Okla., Aug. 19 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc. (NYSE: PPD) will utilize its 2009 Las Vegas Summit, September 9-12, as a stage for introducing a marketing platform that will revolutionize the way the company markets its legal service plans throughout the U.S. and four Provinces of Canada. Building upon a successful foundation of direct selling, the new marketing process represents the first re-launch in the 36 year history of the company.   “We’re not replacing our existing marketing methods,” said Pre-Paid Legal Services Founder and CEO Harland C. Stonecipher. “We are introducing a new web-based marketing process that is so comprehensive it impacts our entire marketing program and enhances our existing business model.”   Although PPD is keeping the specifics of this initiative under wraps until the Las Vegas event, the company introduced a package of special August promotions to encourage more U.S. and Canadian Associates to come to the 2009 Summit to be a part of the company’s historic marketing re-launch and to be on the front line during the roll-out of the new marketing platform.   Launching an Industry When Pre-Paid Legal Services launched on February 9, 1973 in Ada, OK, the concept of prepaid legal service plans was still in its infancy in the U.S. PPD took bold steps to spread the word about this approach to providing quality legal services in a cost-effective legal service plan. With this core vision, the company grew, and in the process garnered accolades from national news media, such as Forbes, Fortune, Money, Financial World, Black Enterprise and others. On August 22, 2007, USA Today published an article, based on its own database study of company stock value at corporations where the founder remained at the helm. In this broad ranging study that included 63 companies, PPD ranked third on the list with a 15-year stock gain of 4,302 percent.   PPD has also been the recipient of a number of awards and corporate recognition. In 2006, the Foundation for Fair Civil Justice designated PPD for the “Line in the Sand” award for the company’s battle against abuse of the legal system. In addition, PPD was pleased to see the National Association of Attorneys General adopt the “Resolution in Support of the Concept of Prepaid Legal Services Plans” in 2008.   Marketing Re-Launch “If ever there was a time when we needed to make affordable legal services available to people, the time is now,” Stonecipher said. “As a result of the prolonged recession, all too many citizens are facing significant challenges, such as foreclosure, bankruptcy and credit issues.” Armed with the right legal services, including direct access to designated, customer-focused attorneys, individuals have the best means for meeting these financial and personal issues.   Pre-Paid Legal Services now provides legal service plans to approximately 1.5 million families, yet even with the combined coverage of all legal service plan providers, there remains a large segment of the population without access to legal services. The re-launch of PPD will help us reach a much greater audience within the U.S. and Canadian markets. It will also provide a means for extending the reach and impact of our Independent Associate network.   During a recent teleconference in which he spoke to thousands of PPD Associates, Stonecipher said, “You may not have been here for the launch of Pre-Paid Legal Services in 1973, but you can be a part of our corporate history in September when we announce the re-launch at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas. We’re taking it to a new level from there.”   About PPD Pre-Paid Legal Services was one of the first companies in the United States organized solely to design, underwrite and market legal service plans. PPD provides legal service plans to more than 1.5 million families across the U.S. and Canada. Plan benefits are delivered through a network of independent provider law firms. Members have direct, toll-free access to their provider law firm. Provider firms are carefully selected and quality of service is closely monitored to maintain the high standards of Pre-Paid Legal. The company website is: www.prepaidlegal.com.   Forward-Looking Statements Statements in this press release, other than purely historical information, regarding our future plans and objectives and expected operating results, dividends and share repurchases and statements of the assumptions underlying such statements, constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The forward-looking statements contained herein are based on certain assumptions that may not be correct. They are subject to risks and uncertainties incident to our business that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties are described in the reports and statements filed by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including (among others) those listed in our Form 10-K, Form 10-Q and Form 8-K, and include the risks that our membership persistency or renewal rates may decline, that we may not be able to continue to grow our memberships and earnings, that we are dependent on the continued active participation of our principal executive officer, that pending or future litigation may have a material adverse effect on us if resolved unfavorably to us, that we may have compromises of our information security, that during an economic downturn in the economy consumer purchases of discretionary items may be affected which could materially harm our sales, retention rates, profitability and financial condition, that we could be adversely affected by regulatory developments, that competition could adversely affect us, that we are substantially dependent on our marketing force, that our stock price may be affected by short sellers, that we have been unable to increase our employee group membership sales and that our active premium in force is not indicative of future revenue as a result of changes in active memberships from cancellations and additional membership sales. Please refer to pages 15 – 17 of our 2008 Form 10-K for a more complete description of these risks. We undertake no duty to update any of the forward-looking statements in this release.      For more information about Pre-Paid Legal Services, you can log on to http://www.prepaidlegal.com/hub/bking62 , http://www.BrandonKing.greatcareerplan.com , or you can also call 1-866-510-7907.

Ex-Informant Charged With Largest Credit Card Heist in US

y Erika Morphy
E-Commerce Times 
Part of the ECT News Network 
08/18/09 1:55 PM PT

New charges have been brought against a hacker already awaiting trials in two other cases of identity theft. In the latest indictment, 28-year-old Albert Gonzalez is accused of participating in the theft of 130 million credit card numbers. Two others are charged with conspiring in the crime.

Albert Gonzalez, 28, a hacker already in jail awaiting trial for what was deemed the largest identity theft in the U.S., has apparently topped himself. Along with two unnamed coconspirators, Gonzalez has been indicted by a federal grand jury in New Jersey for an identity theft that trumps the previous record-setter: 130 million credit and debit card numbers stolen over a two-year period, from 2006 to 2008.

At one point, Gonzalez was working as an informant with the U.S. Secret Service to hunt hackers, while at the same time allegedly stealing data.

Storied Resume

In August 2008, the Department of Justice fingered Gonzalez as the ringleader of a hacker gang that stole 40 million credit card numbers — then believed to be the largest single case of hacking theft. Consumers at T.J. Maxx, Barnes & Noble, Sports Authority and OfficeMax were victimized in that raid. Those charges were filed in the District of Massachusetts. Gonzalez will face them in a trial scheduled to begin in 2010.

In May 2008, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York charged Gonzalez in connection with the hacking of a computer network run by a national restaurant chain. Trial on those charges is scheduled to begin in Long Island, N.Y., in September 2009.

This latest episode is also the most audacious, according to the Department of Justice. The Miami-based Gonzalez and two Russian accomplices hacked into corporate databases five times over a two-year time period, using a SQL injection attack to target 7-Eleven, Heartland Payment Systems and Hannaford Brothers, a Maine-based supermarket chain, among other companies.

The three allegedly hacked into the networks and placed backdoor access in the systems to allow them to revisit without detection in order to steal the data. They would then send the data to servers in California, Illinois, Latvia, the Netherlands and Ukraine for resale to criminals.

If convicted, Gonzalez faces up to 35 years in prison and US$500,000 in fines.

The Department of Justice did not return the E-Commerce Times’ call requesting comment in time for publication.

The fact that Gonzalez acted as an informant for the Secret Service and then turned around and played the government “is a common problem in law enforcement — but particularly acute in the prosecution of cybercrimes,” said Alexander H. Southwell, an attorney with Gibson Dunn & Crutcher’s white collar defense and investigations practice.

“That is because prosecutors and law enforcement are very dependent on using insiders to penetrate criminal activity,” Southwell told the E-Commerce Times. “These cases are hard to crack without somebody on the inside because of the nature of cybercrime.”

Informers have a tendency to think that because they have protection from the government, they get a free pass on anything else they want to do, he noted.

Familiar Environment

Apart from the James Bond elements of these cases, they’re much the same as other massive identity thefts. Despite episode after episode, the underlying breeding ground hasn’t changed. That environment is characterized both by the government’s patchwork approach to protection — which often allows perpetrators to escape undetected — and the reluctance of retailers to implement stronger security measures.

The United States follows a “sectoral” approach to cybersecurity, M. Peter Adler, an attorney at Pepper Hamilton, told the E-Commerce Times.

“This means that regulations and industry standards pertaining to information security may vary slightly for companies in healthcare, financial services, [firms that have] government contracts or that use payment cards,” he explained.

“Layer state laws on this, such as those in Massachusetts and California, and a company is left with a patchwork quilt of protections that are often not completely understood and that can result in security gaps,” said Adler, adding that what the country really needs is a unified and comprehensive approach to cybersecurity that will keep up with the hackers.

The private sector must step up as well, said Robert Siciliano, CEO of IDTheftSecurity.com.

“Credit card companies, banks and retailers … clearly make huge profits that trump the losses from fraud — otherwise, they’d do something to stop fraud,” Siciliano told the E-Commerce Times.

“Credit card fraud can be stopped dead with numerous technologies that make the data useless to the thieves,” he noted, “but until banks, retailers and the credit card companies adopt them, the bleeding will continue.”

The recession is not helping, either.

Even if the government were strongly pushing more protective measures, said Adam Levin, cofounder of Identity Theft 911, it would have to balance those against the inevitable legitimate purchases stymied by such measures.

Furthermore, state governments in the forefront of enforcement have been forced to cut back because of budget cuts, he told the E-Commerce Times.

“Ultimately, it won’t be the government that solves this problem, but ultimate regulators of our economy — class action attorneys,” Levin concluded

 

 

 

 

 

 

           This is just another instance of personal information being stolen and tens of millions are now potential victims of Identity              Theft. It once again goes to show people it is not what we are doing with our information, but what others do with that                      information that can cause plenty of trouble. If you are concerned that you may be affected by this latest breach, or just                        concerned about Identity Theft, please log on to http://www.prepaidlegal.com/idt/bking62 or call 1-866-510-7907.

Identity Theft Victim Speaks Out About 16 Year Ordeal

 

JACKSONVILLE, FL — Like many of us, Ieshia Brown has heard of identity theft, but now she’s living it and says it is a nightmare.

Brown says,”It is terrible! My credit is ruined and now it has messed up my driving record.”

Brown says it started in 1993 with her driver’s license. Someone had stolen her ID and used it to get a license. “I’ve been in jail because of an outstanding warrant for worthless checks in my name and it wasn’t me,” says Brown.

Brown says that case was dismissed, but the problems related to ID theft continue to haunt her.

In February, because of the number of moving violations in her name, the state revoked her driver’s license and called her an Habitual Traffic Offender.

“I’ve had about ten tickets since driving all of those are by someone else, those are five pages of tickets,” says Brown.

In 1997, the DMV provided Brown with a letter showing that an imposter had used her ID to obtain a license. The state then placed a fraud alert on her driving record.

“I don’t know what to do to get it straight,” says Brown.

Brown says the fraud alert apparently did not help, and all she wants his her life back to normal.

“I want my license back and my driving record straight,” says Brown.

Until it is, if she’s caught driving she faces up to 15 months in jail, something she says she wants to avoid.

‘On Your Side’ contacted the Florida DMV. Spokesperson Ann Nucatola says generally if someone finds themselve the victim of identity theft, all they have to do is take a copy of the police report to the district office and request an adminstrative review.

Nucatola says given the lengthy history of problems with Browns driving license, they are now reviewing the case.

The Federal Trade Commission has tips on protecting yourself from identity theft and what to do if you’re a victim, CLICK HERE to find out more

 

For more information on Identity Theft as well as what you can do before you become a victim of Identity Theft, please call 1-866-510-7907 or log on to http://www.prepaidlegal.com/idt/bking62 or http://www.greatworkplan.com/betterlife4u

Jerome Corsi on Alex Jones 8/7/2009 : Obama’s Star is Falling