Drastic changes to government are underway across the globe.
By the year 2020 we will all be governed by a new system of law.

http://nord.twu.net/acl/dawson.html
The Anti-Communitarian League (ACL)
Grassroots Research & Analysis of the Ultimate Third Way
[ HOME ] - [ Research ] - [ Contact ]

2020 by Niki Raapana with Nordica Friedrich,
a common citizen's guide to the Emerging Supra-National Empire

Dawson et. al. v The City of Seattle et. al.

a 4th Amendment Lawsuit For Wrongful Search & Seizure

by Niki Raapana, updated 2/24/05

Now you can go directly to the Dawson Appeal Brief

Here's the Dawson Appelate Court's Decision.

Update September 13, 2006. The Dawson appeal was decided last January! I never heard a word from anyone about it. Wow. Anyway, the appeal was DENIED-LOST because the plaintiff's did not establish the City's training program that established they were the cause of the expanded police routine used during the Dawson raid. I knew Dawson would lose, because Margaret Boyle insisted on leaving out the most damaging evidence of the City of Seattle's plans.

I brought the Dawson clients to Maragaret Boyle in April 2001. I provided Boyle thousands of the City's planning documents. I made detailed charts for her so that she could see all the programs, federal grants and federal participants in the raid. Boyle refused to include any of my government PDA documents that established evidence for the federal and City training of the individual police officers. She never included anything that connected the raid to the COMPASS database pilot test. She never included the fact that SPD Officer Dornay called the search "a WTO training exercise." The Dawson lawsuit did not provide evidence of HUD's Weed & Seed programs, the Creating Safe Streets Initiative, or any other "training." I provided Boyle and Vera with hundreds of copies of the City's planning and training documents (including personal emails and meeting notes) that showed their extensive preparation for this new type of Public Health search. I provided Boyle with an abundance of evidence that showed the EXACT training the individual SPD officers who detained the plaintiffs and searched their "boardinghouses" received. I provided Boyle with the documents that showed CPT officers were trained by the federal office of Community Oriented Policing in D.C. I showed her meeting notes where CPT-SPD Officer Cindy Granard helped the City of Seattle to rewrite laws. Boyle screamed at me almost constantly. She insisted all of my planning and training docs had NOTHING to do with her case.

I quit "helping" her in April 2003 and I've been out of the "loop" ever since. I was sure Boyle was stripping the case of the most important evidence. Attorney Boyle flat refused to include any of the abaundance of documentary evidence of the COPS' connection to United Nation's Local Agenda 21 Plans. She refused to include documents that showed the numerous other "new" city, state and federal agencies involved in rebuilding the Roosevelt neighborhood. She refused to include the purpose for designating the houses as "boarding houses." She refused to include my research on the "Rooming and Boarding House Committee," nor would she provide the court with evidence of the plans to "clean up" the Roosevelt Neighborhood and what it had to do with Puget Sound Light Link Rail Development. Her main reason was always that so much evidence would only confuse the jury. But, then Boyle went for a summary judgement (no jury at all) and the court decision was based on not enough EVIDENCE of the planning! And, not at all suprising is the court's support for heavy handed police tactics based on the whole Keith Gilbert "connection." (There is an amazing amount of speculation surrounding Glibert. It's possible he has CIA connections. See: Dawson-Glibert.) The City used neo-Nazi Aryan Nation Gilbert's violent history as justification for the police accompanying the Public Health inspectors and detaining the tenants of a house in Gilbert's neighborhood. The Dawson raid did not happen at a Gilbert residence... he was a loud, obnoxious, creepy neighbor who rented several other houses from landowner Hugh Sisley. Boyle always insisted that Gilbert and Sisley had "nothing" to do with the Daswon lawsuit. Oh really? Good job Margaret!


Two days before Dawson was heard, a neighborhood wacko who was friends with the owner and the renter was arrested. The only newspaper article that covered the Dawson appeal tied their case directly to Keith Gilbert, a national icon for all that is disgusting about humanity. Gilbert fits too perfectly into the City's plans for community redevelopment, and his background proves he can be "instrumental" in getting UN Hate Crimes legislation passed (Idaho- 1982). Now not only can they use Gilbert to justify eliminating the 4th Amendment Rights for the Dawson clients, they can use him to tie the "far-right," the ACL, the American Militia and U.S. Property Rights defenders all conviently into "global terrorism." Gilbert's reputation is proving to be worth a lot to the City and federal police. Next we'll see Seattle rise indignantly to rush a UN Hate Crime Bill into law. Dawson turns out to be a key ingrediant to establishing greater police powers in the U.S.

February 18, 2005 Rat search's link to neo-Nazi; Rooming-house residents claim civil rights violated in 1999 police-aided raid by Paul Shukovsky, Seattle P-I.

Note: The ACL is not Right, Left or 3rd Way, and I was sued by Hugh Sisley for refusing to work with Keith Gilbert and coming out against him. (Assistant Seattle City Attorney Darby DuComb told me this after her testimony on my behalf in Sisley v. Raapana, 1/6/02. It was from Darby's testimony that I learned my docs had helped the City identify the mistakes they had made with the project. I thought Hugh evicted me because Dawson took so long to file. Dawson wasn't filed until May 2002.)

Apparently Dawson was argued before three 9th Circuit Court Judges on February 17, 2005. Jose Vera argued for the clients. Margaret Boyle was out of town. Client Shelly Sogga told us via email Jose thought it went well. The ACL was not pre-informed of the exact date or time of the oral presentations. Our apologies to those who expressed interest in attending the courtroom. We've been out of the loop on the entire case since April 2003. As it turned out, I was never called to testify or to make any kind of statement in relation to my work or contribution the case, let alone as a witness to the client's "distress." The Dawson attorneys refused to include any of the direct COPS input into the planning for new laws and policies, such as their new standard policy of using community and SWAT police to "accompany public health inspectors."

The Dawson attorneys addressed only the fundamental wrongs perpetrated against the Dawson clients on September 30, 1999. They did not identify the plans or the policies tested during the search by teams of City employees. Since I address the case in its entire scope, I was obviously deemed unsuitable to attend or witness arguments in a case I worked over three years to get into a courtroom. I provided the Dawson attorneys with hard won PDA documents they used to file their case, and I endured the abusive tirades over specific planning documents that upset Margaret. It never made sense that she was so mad I could show official documents that proved the police suggested the new laws. Such disrespectful discrimination against me for my contributions is hard to understand unless I step back and look at the dialectic I participated in furthering.

Keith Gilbert co-filed the original "Dawson raid" lawsuit with Todd Ade and Bob Nelson in Ade v. Coppock. The federal judge dropped Gilbert from the complaint but allowed Todd to re-file alone. (Gilbert did a wonderful snow job with all his "frivolous lawsuits" and de-legitimized any future, valid lawsuits that may have resulted from the actions taken in Roosevelt against Sisley properties.)

Thursday, February 17, 2005 Neo-Nazi accused of peddling machine guns was feared by some; Health inspectors once asked for police escort on housing search By PAUL SHUKOVSKY, SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER. Once? And, come on, now even Hugh is saying he's afraid of Keith? Hugh never ceased defending Keith to me, and he was never afraid of Keith in my presence. Hugh tried for years to make me deal with Gilbert regarding my rental home. Hugh supported Gilbert in everything Keith ever did. Hugh said Keith was like his brother and I was being judgemental in my assessment of Gilbert's character. Hugh brought Keith to my house several times after I had 86'd him and was furious with me when I refused to let him in my house.

Bad pennies was written and posted by David Neiwert, "a freelance journalist based in Seattle on Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2005. His reportage for MSNBC.com on domestic terrorism won the National Press Club Award for Distinguished Online Journalism in 2000." Neiwert has extensive background on Gilbert, and in his blog comments we find one responder (Paul) who ties the ACL to Gilbert and right-wing extremism and links directly to our article about CAPR: "Are you sure that there's no connection between the Sisleys and the Far right? There are some weird things going on. Take a look at the "roosevelt Community Association" which is open only to residents of the Sisleys' property. (Take a look at hughsisley.com for the weird coincedence)... Also, take a look at the links between Citizen's Alliance for Property Rights (CAPR) and the far right, as exemplified by http://nord.twu.net/acl/CAPRarticle.html. The property rights movement popping up in rural King County represents some legitimate anger, but it seems to be manipulated by many on the far right..." The ACL is neither far-right, far-left, or Third Way. But who can expect the Seattle left or right to grasp the Hegelian conflicts they promote?

The BATF-FBI-HS "team" must know Keith and Hugh carried hundreds of bags into Hugh's garbage truck. Keith called Hugh "Uncle Hugh" and they were always together. We all knew about Keith's despicable past and his stupid threats and his ridiculous lawsuits, and it was all okay with Hugh (and Keith's neighborhood co-litigants Bob and Abby, as with Frankenfield v. Backmon). They most definately know who Bob Nelson is. He's another convicted felon who works for Sisley. Bob told me last fall Keith needed to "go down" because he was causing too many problems. Nelson was convicted of computer crimes, and he hosts the website for the Seattle Fire Department. Bob said he met Gilbert through the prison where he served his time. Bob authored several of Keith's lawsuits at the same time he assisted David Vogel with Sisley's legal battles.

We can't help but wonder if Bob Nelson is the unidentified federal informant and if Keith Gilbert was a plant. If so, then Hugh and Martha Sisley (and perhaps Abby and Bob) are in a very tenuous position. Now the COPS can say the Sisley "projects" harbors known terrorists!

For years Hugh stole ACL research and gave it to Gilbert, Nelson, and Frankenfield to use in all of their lawsuits. I helped Abby from Feb 2001 to May 2001, when she suddenly "disappeared." (The next time I saw Abby was on January 6, 2002, when she witnessed against me for Hugh. Of course, after Jose questioned her, it was obvious she had no relevant testimony and she was quickly dismissed.) Many of the 2500 ACL docs subpoena'd in Frankenfield were also used to file Dawson, and Abby used Keith to serve papers in her case. We argued about it and Abby very, very reluctantly agreed to abstain from any association with Gilbert while I was assisting her. We've never spoken since the night she called over and over, crying so hard she couldn't talk, mumbling, "You have no idea...you just have no idea..."

One of Hugh's attorneys, David Vogel, was Todd Ade's attorney by then and he was supposed to work with Boyle and Vera. Dawson attorneys hired a PR firm (who asked me?? to gather data on all the clients for them!) My sister, Susan Friedrich, pitched the Dawson raid story to Adam at Real Change magazine. I provided her with City documents I had obtained under the PDA and arranged interviews with Abby and the Dawson clients. "Abby's Story" was published in Real Change in July 2001 under Adam's authorship. It was such a different version than the one Susan submitted she asked that her name be taken off the story. Vogel dropped Todd's lawsuit sometime in the summer 2001, soon after Abby settled for $5000. (And when she promised me, "If I get a dime, you get a nickel," she was lying.)

The City backed off from their innovative "Roosevelt Parking Lot Project" in September of 2001, and in November 2001, Hugh taught me the harshest lesson about humanity I've ever learned. He fired me (and said I'd never worked for him), evicted me, and then charged me back rent for a year and a half. Dawson attorney Jose Vera defended me pro bono in an expedited hearing he advised against. We lost, and I refused to consider counter-suing Hugh, mainly because the lawyers had yet to find the time to file Dawson. I finished the Dawson timelines while living in a tent on a farm over in Hansville, WA, from January to April 2002.

Todd was the official "renter" at the Dawson homes, yet Todd deferred to Keith on everything that had to do with his Sisley rental properties because Hugh required it of him. Keith made sure the City thought he managed Todd's houses. Keith is the one ordering Drucilla Hardee out of Todd's house in April 1999, five months before the raid. The P-I was there that day. (Roosevelt neighbors battle owner of decaying houses). Keith told the City he owned several Sisley homes, and the City still may not know all the houses Hugh Sisley actually own in Roosevelt. The question remains, why did Hugh Sisley surround himself with felons and liars? And, I could never figure out why Gilbert only served five years for stealing explosives to assasinate Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Not even the Aryan Nation in Idaho trusted Gilbert. So why did Hugh?

The fact is, Gilbert's actions worked perfectly for the City in this "fight" between the Sisleys and the City planning councils. Hugh, Drake, Keith and Todd had nothing to do with Todd's roommates (who were subjected to the hostage situation), and the City always KNEW this. The Dawson clients had no idea they were the pawns in a land war, and when they found out they couldn't have cared less. I was the one who convinced Shelly Sogga to consider a pro bono lawsuit. We went to meet Margaret Boyle together, and we brought Jerri Dawson into it. Jerri brought Dave Emery, Byron Foltz and Mansar in. Todd Ade was never included in Dawson. Todd Ade also was never concerned about the implications of the Fourth Amendment violations. While his roommates at the white house were kept in detainment, Ade freely walked about his property assisting the COPS with the search. He was later detained with the roommates at the brown house for trying to "get in on" the COPS' "fun." In October 2000, City Attorney Darby DuComb obtained 11 Municipal Court "entry orders" into Sisley rentals and Hugh never bothered to warn ANY of the tenants about the City's plan to seal off the street and search and detain ALL his tenants in those houses.

A Roosevelt parent explains Seattle's Local Agenda 21 on Neiwert's blog: "With the reconstruction of RHS there is a conflict over parking (ask the folks who live on 68th)... and the Sisleys are doing their best to wrangle money out of the city with their supposed "development". I think with this new development, that condemnation should start on the properties between 65th and RHS between 15th and 16th... and perhaps some more --- because a "higher and best use" of those properties compared to what they are now is as a parking lot (not only for the high school, but also for the proposed light rail station)."

Keith Gilbert's name is mentioned in the Dawson appeal, yet Margaret insisted (to me) more than once that her case had "nothing to do with Keith Gilbert, or Hugh Sisley." If Keith is so connected to Dawson, then wouldn't it also apply that Hugh, as the owner of the property, would be even more closely associated with Dawson? And if these men are the reason for the illegal search and seizure claimed by Dawson, wouldn't the City's plans against Sisley properties be sort of important to the case?

From the Dawson Appeal:

"Last and most significantly, the detentions here failed to promote officer safety and thus fail to meet the last of the Summers factors, which is detention are more reasonable when they promote officer safety. The defendants will likely counter this assertion by claiming the detention protected them (1) from a dangerous individual, Gilbert, known to associate with a large number of boarding houses in the neighborhood, including 6418 and 6420, (2) from the possibility that the residents might leave the premises to seek outside assistance to impede the searches, and (3) from the unknown boarding house occupants.

Although perhaps initially appealing, these rationales fail when compared to the contemporaneous uncontested evidence and when assessed under this Court's holding in Ganwich. Factually, it is uncontested that SPD's local community police officer Bauer was familiar with Gilbert and that she participated in the initial entry and detention of the occupants. She failed to identify Gilbert as being in either residence. Interestingly though Ofc. Bauer admits that during pervious boarding house inspections where Gilbert had appeared, he was not a problem when she was at the scene in "stand-by" mode-her mere presence kept him a bay. In fact, it is uncontested that the SPD were so concerned with Gilbert's possible presence that instead of posting a look out to alert the DPH inspectors if he appeared, they focused all their energies in the premises for the duration of each search.

Factually related to the Gilbert issue are the uncontested facts that the officers (1) allowed one resident to leave the premises at the commencement of the search without being detained, (2) searched the two residences in sequence as opposed to simultaneously, and (3) allowed Ade to roam the properties during the search to open doors, but also possibly to destroy evidence of rat infestation. These facts are related to the Gilbert issue because it was quite possible for the released occupant to go and seek outside assistance. It appears also quite possible for Ade to have sought outside assistance. Last, because they searched the residences in sequence and because their close proximity to each other, the residences of 6420, the second house to be searched knew about the search both from their own observations and from Ade: they could have easily left to seek outside assistance or otherwise impede the search. These facts eviscerate any claim that the detention was for officer safety to prevent the summoning of outside assistance, whether from Gilbert or anyone else. If officer safety was the reason for the detention, then the officers would have not let anyone leave the scene, would have controlled Ade's movements, and would have search the two residences simultaneously." [end quote]

Why did the Dawson attorneys call the residences "boarding houses" when they were fully aware of the agenda planned by the COPS' Rooming & Boarding House Committee? What is the definition of "police help?" The COPS ran the Dawson raid from beginning to end, they weren't helping public health inspectors search for rats. Residents were detained in their pajamas and bathrobes, while police searched their private rooms for cleanliness, drugs, weapons, and went through drawers and reading materials--including journals, letters, and porno magazines. The COPS ran background checks on every tenant and several hostages described a plainclothed agent in the detainment room using a handheld compter that was malfunctioning (which could explain why the search lasted for over two hours). Did they also perform on-the-spot "potential for crime analysis?"

Aren't rats nocturnal? Only five residents orignally signed on with the Dawson attorneys, even though thirteen residents were held hostage that day (the only tenant allowed to leave was a woman who helped the City get inside the house prior to the raid). There are still too many unanswered questions. I have never been told who was in charge of the operation. Even SPD Officer Dornay, a CPT who participated in the "WTO [World Trade Organization -- Nov 30, 1999] Training Exercise" didn't know who was in charge. The City of Seattle said they didn't have a list of everyone present that day. SPD told me they didn't have any planning notes for the action.

I've spent almost six years (and six gazillion cups of coffee) studying the entire background for the Dawson raid. I may be tired and overworked (and definately underpaid), but based on everything I have seen, I am now fairly convinced that I was used by the City to obtain a precedent setting case that would establish this "standard" operation for the new federal police (now all under one central agency called The The National Security Director).

I used to think Dawson was never supposed to get into a courtroom or receive any public scrutiny. We waited over two years just for Margaret to file it. I refused to give it up, so they pursued it, but not the case I brought them. By the time it was filed they had left out all the parts that made it a worthwhile case, namely the fact that Federal COPS planned it and used it as a training exercise that included datagathering. After a while, all that seemed to matter was the money (which was fine with the clients), and both Dawson attorneys told me they couldn't afford to take it past summary judgement. I was shocked when they appealed. The clients are all fairly poor (even though Emery is a famous local artist and Shelly has a good wage job) and could barely pay filing fees. I was paid about $1000.00 for the timelines. It just didn't make sense that the attorneys continued the fight, not until I considered who the outcome will ultimately benefit. And the last thing they wanted was to have me show up and start asking questions again. We have already connected too many dots. Today, the dots tell me this case is very important to the new federal police who now direct and control every government agency in the country. Talk about a checkmate situation. "Whoa," is about all I can say anymore about Dawson. Simply "whoa." They win.

More links to national news reports on Gilbert's arrest here.

January 15, 2005 update:
We're on the docket for oral arguments before the 9th District Court of Appeals! As soon as I have the exact date and time I'll post it here. Attorney Jose Vera will argue for Dawson . This page barely explains the Dawson case, and I do apologise for that. After thousands of hours of study, discussions, arguments, research, enormous timelines, and the magnitude of documents prepared for this case, I wrote hundreds of (unanswered) letters explaining our "problem," and I just didn't have the desire to try to explain it all again here. My latest article WA State Senator tells CAPR "there's a much larger, grandiose plan" explains a bit more about the situation surrounding Dawson, as does our Neighborhood Plans page.


A little more background on the Dawson raid

In the last decade of the 20th century, Seattle, Washington was designated as a pilot test for several different federal and state agencies. Funding for the many grants came from a variety of sources and were difficult to trace. Names of participating agencies and committees were changed frequently. Programs were transferred from departments. Several of the tests were designed to find "innovative" ways to get around the Fourth Amendement requirements for a legal search (SPD Chief Norm Stamper 1997). New Community COPS suggested new laws that would help them find the ways.

Roosevelt Neighborhood Association members worked with the federal COPS to redesign the Bill of Rights in Seattle. All of the programs require extensive datagathering. Datagathering is a priority of all sustainable development planning. The Dawson clients were never asked for permission from the government to be used as Human Subject's Research in a DOJ-COMPASS pilot test in 2000. Not one of the Dawson clients was aware they were being tested. The Dawson clients never gave their written permission for their personally identifiable files gathered by COPS under the Weed & Seed pilot program in 1999 to be transferred to COMPASS in June 2000. The Dawson clients were never asked if they wanted to be the guinea pigs in what SPD Officers told the ACL in October, 1999 was a "WTO Training Excercise." (This was the first time I ever heard the WTO acronym! I knew absolutely nothing when I began asking where Seattle got the authority to perform these tests.)

Dawson et. al. v The City of Seattle et. al is a Fourth Amendment (unlawful search and seizure) case against the City of Seattle and participating County agencies for using a SWAT team to deliver a public health warrant, on September 30, 1999, for "suspicion of harboring rats and bugs." Nine residents not mentioned in the scope of the warrant were detained under armed guard for two and one half hours. Residents were interrogated and held hostage while their private bedrooms were searched by identified community police team members (known personally to the ACL from R&B planning meetings). Five of the "Sisley Project" rental tenants oringinally sued Seattle government in King County Superior Court on May 2, 2002 under the WA State Constitution. Dawson is a fairly straight up 4th Amendment lawsuit. It does not address the communitarian laws inside Seattle's U.N. Local Agenda 21 Plan (aka: Roosevelt Neighborhood Plan) that gave the police permission to change U.S. law for expanded and fully extended use of this new type of "standard action" (previously only for gangs and drugs... not bugs).


January 14, 2004, great news!
The Dawson appeal was filed by attorneys Margaret Boyle and Jose Vera on December 17, 2003. We have a copy, but we're not quite sure if we have permission to post our copy of the appeal here. (We have absolutely no background in legal proceedings... our contribution to the Dawson lawsuit was primarily via our providing public disclosure documents we had obtained from the City and County that verified their "new enforcement procedures.") Boyle and Vera prepared their 53 page appeal based on established constitutional case law that has previously determined the parameters for government intrusions under the Fourth Amendment. The City of Seattle won the first round against Dawson based on the communitarian government's claim that community police and SWAT teams serving rat and bug warrants are merely following established procedures for public health and safety.


October 8, 2003, final update:
Dawson lost, Lasnik ruled against them on all five claims September 23 or 24th, 2003, according to Jeri Dawson, a plaintiff on Dawson. No word from the Dawson attorneys, but this doesn't suprise us. Nothing shows up in a search of Seattle newspapers... but this doesn't suprise us either. The raid itself was never covered in the press, or investigated by ANYONE besides us; it was a silent-covert operation, a communitarian pilot test that was never supposed to come under public scrutiny, let alone come before a jury of Americans who still believe they have a Fourth Amendment.


August 30, 2003 update:
Dawson is under summary judgement with Judge Robert Lasnik, Ninth District Court. The scheduled trial date is still October 6, 2003, unless Lasnik rules entirely in one side's favor and the whole case ends right there. Did some poking around to see who Judge Robert Lasnik is:

Appointed by Clinton in 1998, he has a master's from Northwestern. Some of his rulings covered in law journals and the American Free Press:

Fraud (Dismissal): In re Network Commerce Sec. Litig. - Seattle Judge Tosses Shareholder Class Action Against Network Commerce By: Staff Writer, Securities Litigation & Regulation Reporter. October 9, 2002, Stanford Law School.

IRB e-mail of September 6, 2002 Subject: FYI - Human Subject Research Misadventure, Friday, August 09, 2002, Judge: Hutch didn't reveal study's risk to patient, By David Heath, Seattle Times staff reporter.

Judging a Doctor, BY GEOV PARRISH, Published in Seattle Weekly, November 6 - 12, 2002.

Judge: Violent-game law stifles speech, By Lisa M. Bowman, Staff Writer, CNET News.com July 11, 2003, 11:45 AM PT.

United Property Owners, a very relevant case.


April 20, 2003 update:
I've been named as a witness in Dawson so I will not be able to continue following the case here. Unless somebody else begins covering it, this page will not be updated until after the case is settled. I always hoped this story would generate an unbiased reporter, back in the old days I used to send out pleas, and after our local press refused to even ask me one question, I begged everyone from Dana Milbank at the Washington Post to Karl Caplan at the New York Times to investigate. The best I could ever get to cover this whole Roosevelt Pilot Test story was my sister Susan. She won't write about Dawson anymore, ever since the editor of Real Change completely rewrote her 2001 article, "Abby's Story".)

We'll consult with both the Dawson and the Seattle City and King County attorneys for this page, after it settles.

We'll also contact the City and the County and ask for information about the law firm defending them, and maybe their attorney's will provide us with their analysis of the facts surrounding this case (and we'll see if we can find out how much money they have behind them, too). Dawson v. Seattle is an ongoing Fourth Amendment lawsuit in Ninth District Court, and their attorneys are performing a great service to all free people who believe in the protections guaranteed by the U.S. Bill of Rights.

Maybe Attorney Margaret Boyle, who co-represents the Dawson clients, has time to provide us with a short overview of the case, including whatever it is attorneys are allowed to talk about. Since the local news has never been interested in covering Dawson, (just as the ACL learned the ACLU isn't interested in representing genuine individual American liberty) this may be the only place with updates on this pertinent court challenge to the U.N.'s authority to require Americans to submit to COPS' private home inspections and data-gathering interviews.

Will there ever be a lawsuit that provides us with an answer to:
What kind of political system forces us to allow our personal data to be used in covert community mapping and planning programs?


[ BACK TO TOP ]

copyright © 2001-2004, Niki Raapana and Nordica Friedrich (The Anti-Communitarian League)