Visibility Eto Business Process Automation Profiled by Manufacturing Journalist Tr Cutler

According to Stephen Carson, executive vice president of Visibility Corporation, “The decision to invest in business process automation is significant and often part of a project-based manufacturer’s lean initiative. ETO companies must consider the value of significantly reducing bidding, engineering and manufacturing cycle times; reducing product rework; and improving customer service and internal communication. There […]

Judgment Calls: Principle and Politics in Constitutional Law

Vanderbilt Law School professor and constitutional law expert Suzanna Sherry discusses the role and responsibility of the Supreme Court in interpreting the Constitution. She also examines the issue of politics and the Court. Sherry is the author of a new book, Judgment Calls: Principle and Politics in Constitutional Law.

Duration : 0:19:23

Read more about Judgment Calls: Principle and Politics in Constitutional Law

The Librarians Who Battled the Patriot Act – David Goodman

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/04/14/Amy_and_David_Goodman_Standing_Up_to_the_Madness

Mother Jones journalist David Goodman tells the story of four Connecticut librarians who were ordered by the FBI to release library records under the Patriot Act. After filing suit against the Attorney General to challenge the order, the librarians eventually won the case.

—–

The longtime host of the award-winning Pacifica Radio’s Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman has steadfastly covered grassroots activism, the political process, and government accountability. She has co-authored many books with her brother and fellow journalist, David Goodman.

Their collaborations include investigations into the mercenary aspects of war, media culpability, freedom of information, and international human rights, and seek not only to expose endemic corruption, but also to affect change.

Their bestselling book, The Exception to the Rulers: Exposing Oily Politicians, War Profiteers, and the Media That Love Them, examines the full political spectrum, from The Washington Post to Bill Clinton, in an effort to bring genuine accountability into public discourse. The Goodmans’ latest project is Standing Up to the Madness: Ordinary Heroes in Extraordinary Times. Standing Up to the Madness celebrates grassroots activists across America and the power of the individual to bring change on a local and national level. – City Arts and Lectures

David Goodman is a contributing writer for Mother Jones. and co-author of Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders and the People Who Fight Back.

Duration : 0:9:31

Read more about The Librarians Who Battled the Patriot Act – David Goodman

Tax laws

Tax laws from Power Tax Relief. http://www.Power-Tax.com offers IRS debt settlement and resolution, wage garnishment relief and bank levy help services. Reduce your IRS Tax Debt: Tax laws. Visit http://www.Power-Tax.com today or call 800-700-6948 for more information about Tax laws. IRS tax debt relief, IRS offer in compromise, tax offer in compromise, tax late fees, IRS late fees, IRS wage garnishment, back taxes, IRS tax lien, income tax attorney, federal tax relief, tax debt relief, IRS debt settlement

Duration : 1 min 9 sec

Read more about Tax laws

Need a Lawyer for Truck Accident Case | Rasansky Law Firm

http://bit.ly/a8133D
If you need a lawyer for a truck accident case, The Rasansky Law Firm is here to fight for you. If you have been hit by a semi truck or 18 wheeler, you will need a lawyer to help get compensation for your losses, damages, and pain and suffering. Trucking companies have teams of lawyers fighting to keep money in their pockets, hire an experienced semi-truck lawyer to fight to get what you deserve. Call the Rasansky Law Firm for a free case evaluation at 877-331-4156 or visit our website www.TexasInjuryAttorney.com. For more information, please visit www.texastruckwreck.com.

Duration : 0:1:4

Read more about Need a Lawyer for Truck Accident Case | Rasansky Law Firm

Executive orders what are the limits?

I understand what an executive order is, but how far can a president take it? What are the limits and authority allowed? Can it be revoked? They can go so far as to be an entrance to war, like Clinton did with Kosovo, but there are no limits, per se. Article 2 of the Constitution […]

Persecution of communists’ in (fake) western democracies: case law summaries

Q:To what extent did public and political opinion in the west undermine the impartiality of judicial decision-making during the cold-war era?
—————————————-

USA

In a famous dissent, Justice Douglas of the US Supreme Court declared:

‘We have deemed it more costly to liberty to suppress despised minorities than to let them vent their spleen’ (Dennis v United States U.S. 494 at p. 585 (1951) (U.S.S.C.).

No western democracy has practiced the tolerance exposed [mistake in video, it should read “expoused”] by Justice Douglas-in the above statement, without at some stage censoring unpopular organizations. Douglas was in a minority of two on a US Supreme Court bench which upheld convictions entered against Communist party sympathizers for conspiring to overthrow the US government. (Joseph, P,think it’s “1998” edn., Constitutional and Administrative Law in New Zealand, ).

In Dennis v United States, above, the US Supreme Court upheld convictions against communist party officials for conspiring to teach or advocate the overthrow of the government by force or violence. Here, the Court considered that the advocacy of the communist doctrine was to be equated with conspiring to forcibly overthrow the US government.

Dennis was decided in 1951, at the height of cold-war tensions between the USSR and the US. Justice Black aligned with Justice Douglas in the minority stating:

‘Public opinion being what it is now, few will protest the conviction of these Communist petitioners. There is hope, however, that in calmer times, when present pressures, passions, and fears subside, this or some other later court will restore the First Amendment liberties to the high place where they belong in a free society.’ (Dennis, supra, at 581).

Justice Black’s statement was realized six years later in Yates v United States 354 U.S. 298 (1957) (U.S.S.C). This time, a differently constituted Supreme Court bench quashed the convictions of 14 Communist Party leaders that had been entered for similar reasons under the same Act.

With the easing of east-west relations, the Court drew a clear distinction between the advocacy of forcible overthrow of government-as an abstract doctrine, and the advocacy of action to achieve that result.

According to legal philosopher Wolfgang Friedman, it was impossible to remove the judgment of the US Supreme Court from the political tensions and public opinions that existed at that time. (W. Friedman, Legal Theory, (4th edn. , 1960, at p.95).

Australia

Australia also expressed abhorrence at communist doctrine during the post-war era. In Burns v Ransley (1949) 79 C.L.R. 101 (H.C.), the Australian High Court upheld a conviction for sedition entered against a communist speaker who, when asked, announced that, in the event of a war, he would fight on the side of the Soviet Union. He was convicted for words he had spoken in reply to a hypothetical question, and not for inciting mutiny or violence.

The following year the Communist Party Dissolution Act 1950 (Cth) declared the Australian Communist Party to be a revolutionary organization which jeopardized the defence of the Commonwealth. The statute dissolved the Communist Party and all affiliated organizations declared illegal under the Act.

The fundamental democratic principle of freedom of expression was restored when a majority of the High Court of Australia in Australian Communist Party v Commonwealth (1951) 83 CLR 1, declared the Communist Dissolution Act 1950 (Cth) to be unconstitutional and beyond the defence powers of the Commonwealth (see also R v Sharky (1949) 79 CLR 121).

New Zealand

During the early 1980s in New Zealand, Priminister Robert Muldoon took exception to the Socialist Unity Party and questioned it’s right to exist in a free and democratic society. However, a government, expounding the rule of law, must demonstrate greater justification for out-lawing a particular group or organization, for reasons other than personal enmity (Joseph, supra, at p.191).

See also New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s.14 (right to freedom of expression), and related case law; and Human Rights Act 1993, s.21(j)(prohibits discrimination on grounds of political opinion) incorporated, by reference, into s.19 NZBORA; note also- Crimes (Repeal of Seditious Offences) Amendment Act 2007; & see Flags, Emblems, and Names Protection Act 1981, s.11 (offences involving New Zealand flag)

Duration : 0:4:20

Read more about Persecution of communists’ in (fake) western democracies: case law summaries

Calls to ban ‘legal drug’ gaining momentum

Campaigners and some politicians are calling for changes in the law concerning the drug mephedrone. .

.
Follow us on twitter at http://twitter.com/itn_news .

Duration : 0:1:19

Read more about Calls to ban ‘legal drug’ gaining momentum

Round Table : Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments – Opening Session part I

Chair: Professor Martin Scheinin, European University Institute
Welcome: Professor Barak Medina, Dean, Faculty of Law, Hebrew University
Ms Justice Dorit Beinisch, President, the Supreme Court of Israel
Mr Didier Maus, Conseiller dEtat; President, the International Association of Constitutional Law
Professor Claude Klein, Hebrew University:
“The modernity of a constitutional question”
Dr. Sharon Weintal, Hebrew University:
“A typology of the non-amendable provisions in the constitutions”

26.04.10

The Harry and Michael Sacher Institute
for Legislative Research and Comparative Law
The Faculty of Law
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Duration : 1:29:28

Read more about Round Table : Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments – Opening Session part I