Ramanisblog

Tag: United State

  • US Concentration Prison Camps Details Locations

    The Champion of Freedom elsewhere, the US has Concentration Camps, Nazi style, less Gas Chambers, a Mini Guantanamo Bay.

    I have not read anywhere about these Camps and I stumbled upon it while searching for Islamic Terrorism and the rumor that the US has bought 30,000 Guillotins.

    Here is the Story and it is real.

    Prisons, US
    Concentration Camps, US
    Prisons in the US
    Park County – Hart Mountain – Renovated WWII Japanese-American special internment detention facilities.
    North Central part of the state FEMA Detention facility
    Southeast part of the state FEMA Detention facility
    Southwest part of the state FEMA Detention facility
    East Yellowstone – Manned facility. Investigators were apprehended by European soldiers, unable to identify the language used by the foreign soldiers, American government helped clear the situation.
    Prison of US
    Swift Luck Greens, Wyoming,US
    Prison Camp ,US
    Another Concentration Camp,Wyoming ,US

    Story:

    There over 800 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States and all it would take is a presidential signature on a proclamation and the attorney general’s signature on a warrant to which a list of names is attached. Ask yourself if you really want to be on Ashcroft’s list.

    The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA. Rex 84 allowed many military bases to be closed down and to be turned into prisons.

    Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot are the two sub programs which will be implemented once the Rex 84 program is initiated for its proper purpose. Garden Plot is the program to control the population. Cable Splicer is the program for an orderly takeover of the state and local governments by the federal government. FEMA is the executive arm of the coming police state and thus will head up all operations. The Presidential Executive Orders already listed on the Federal Register also are part of the legal framework for this operation.

    The camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners. Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold approximately 2 million people.

    Now let’s review the justification for any actions taken…

    Executive Orders associated with FEMA that would suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These Executive Orders have been on record for nearly 30 years and could be enacted by the stroke of a Presidential pen:…

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990

    allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995

    allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997

    allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998

    allows the government to seize all means of transportation, including personal cars, trucks or vehicles of any kind and total control over all highways, seaports, and waterways.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10999

    allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000

    allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001

    allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002

    designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005

    allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051

    specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310

    grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049

    assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921

    allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation. General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA’s Civil Security Division stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA’s role as a “new frontier in the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination, and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a global audience in times of crisis.” FEMA’s powers were consolidated by President Carter to incorporate the…

    National Security Act of 1947

    allows for the strategic relocation of industries, services, government and other essential economic activities, and to rationalize the requirements for manpower, resources and production facilities.

    1950 Defense Production Act

    gives the President sweeping powers over all aspects of the economy.

    Act of August 29, 1916

    authorizes the Secretary of the Army, in time of war, to take possession of any transportation system for transporting troops, material, or any other purpose related to the emergency.

    International Emergency Economic Powers Act

    enables the President to seize the property of a foreign country or national. These powers were transferred to FEMA in a sweeping consolidation in 1979.

    Where are these camps?

    ALABAMA
    Opelika – Military compound either in or very near town.
    Aliceville – WWII German POW camp – capacity 15,000
    Ft. McClellan (Anniston) – Opposite side of town from Army Depot;
    Maxwell AFB (Montgomery) – Civilian prison camp established under Operation Garden Plot, currently operating with support staff and small inmate population.
    Talladega – Federal prison “satellite” camp.

    ALASKA
    Wilderness – East of Anchorage. No roads, Air & Railroad access only. Estimated capacity of 500,000 Elmendorf AFB – Northeast area of Anchorage – far end of base. Garden Plot facility.
    Eielson AFB – Southeast of Fairbanks. Operation Garden Plot facility.
    Ft. Wainwright – East of Fairbanks.

    Sources:

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_fema02.htm

    http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1062

    Related Articles

     

  • Gun Laws Surprising Why More Shootings Are Not In US!

    While it is saddening to know that there are shootings and Deaths in The US, it is hardly surprising for this endemic phenomena.

    A look at the Gun Laws in The US would tell you why.

    Guns and US
    GUNS

    If the Society has not evolved from the fear Psychosis of the Civil War, and has antidiluvian Laws Governing Gun Control, one should be happy that there are no shoot outs on a Daily Basis.

    Guns and Armaments and The US.

    Look at these figures.

    Rank

    Company

    Country

    Sectors

    		 Arms sales
    (US$ m.)
    Total    sales,
    2010
    (US$ m.)
    Arms sales
    as share of
    total sales,
    2010 (%)
    Total
    profit,
    2010
    (US$ m.)
    Total
    employ-
    ment, 2010
    2010 2009 2010 2009
    1 1 Lockheed Martin United States Aircraft, Electronics, Missiles, Space 35 730 33 430 45 803 78 2 926 132 000
    2 2 BAE Systems United Kingdom Aircraft, Artillery, Electronics, Missiles, Military vehicles, Small arms/ammunition, Ships 32 880 32 540 34 609 95 1 671 98 200
    3 3 Boeing United States Aircraft, Electronics, Missiles, Space 31 360 32 300 64 306 49 3 307 160 500
    4 4 Northrop Grumman United States Aircraft, Electronics, Missiles, Ships, Space 28 150 27 000 34 757 81 2 053 117 100
    5 5 General Dynamics United States Artillery, Electronics, Military vehicles, Small arms/ammunition, Ships 23 940 23 380 32 466 74 2 624 90 000
    • Arms sales are defined by SIPRI as sales of military goods and services to military customers, including both sales for domestic procurement and sales for export. Military goods and services are those that are designed specifically for military purposes and the technologies related to such goods and services.
    • Although it is known that several Chinese arms-producing enterprises are large enough to rank among the SIPRI Top 100, a lack of comparable and sufficiently accurate data makes it impossible to include them. There are also companies in other countries, such as Kazakhstan and Ukraine, that could be large enough to appear in the SIPRI Top 100 list were data available, but this is less certain.
    • Companies are ranked according to the value of their arms sales in 2010. An S denotes a subsidiary company. A dash (–) indicates that the company did not rank among the SIPRI Top 100 for 2009.
    • Company names and structures are listed as they were on 31 Dec. 2010. For subsidiaries and operational companies owned by a holding or investment company, the name of the parent company is given in parentheses along with its country, where it differs.

    Figures for arms sales, total sales and total profit are in millions of US dollars.

    http://www.sipri.org/research/armaments/production/Top100

     

    Since 1992, the United States has exported more than $142 billion dollars worth of weaponry to states around the world.[1] The U.S. dominates this international arms market, supplying just under half of all arms exports in 2001, roughly two and a half times more than the second and third largest suppliers. [2 ] U.S. weapons sales help outfit non-democratic regimes, soldiers who commit gross human rights abuses against their citizens and citizens of other countries, and forces in unstable regions on the verge of, in the middle of, or recovering from conflict.

    U.S.-origin weapons find their way into conflicts the world over. The United States supplied arms or military technology to more than 92% of the conflicts under way in 1999.[3] The costs to the families and communities afflicted by this violence is immeasurable. But to most arms dealers, the profit accumulated outweighs the lives lost. In the period from 1998-2001, over 68% of world arms deliveries were sold or given to developing nations, where lingering conflicts or societal violence can scare away potential investors.[4]  ..

     

    http://www.fas.org/asmp/fast_facts.htm#TheGlobalPicture

    Sales from the 44 US-based companies featured accounted for over 60% of all arms sales by the top 100 producers in 2010, with Lockheed Martin topping the list at $35.7bn (£22.4bn) worth of arms sales in 2010. The Many Eyes below shows the top 100 companies by total arms sales.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/mar/02/arms-sales-top-100-producers

    Gun Control Laws US.

    Guns on Campus

    Dubbed the “Campus Personal Protection Act,” this model legislation would allow handguns to be carried on campus. The ALEC bill would also “limit” regulations that the governing boards of colleges imposed on the carrying of guns on campus.

    The bill is part of a wave of “concealed carry” gun laws that have passed around the nation–some with ALEC’s help. As the Center for Media and Democracy notes, “allowing ‘concealed carry’ has been a long-standing part of the NRA-ALEC agenda, passing in Wisconsin a year ago at the urging of Governor Scott Walker, who was given an award by the NRA for making this item law along with a version of the controversial ALEC-NRA “Stand Your Ground”/”Castle Doctrine” bill. A concealed carry law also was just passed last week in Michigan.”

    2. Immediate Firearm Purchases

    ALEC wants you to be able to get your gun–and get it fast. Blueprint legislation passed by the group’s NRA-chaired “Public Safety and Election Task Force” would prohibit waiting periods from being used on gun purchases. “The imposition of ‘waiting periods’ for firearms purchases is a diversion of scarce law enforcement resources away from violent crime and criminals,” the bill reads. 

    3. More ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws

    The Trayvon Martin case made “stand your ground” laws, or “Castle Doctrine” laws, a household name. Martin’s killer, George Zimmerman, claimed that he acted lawfully in “self-defense” when he shot the unarmed teenager. Florida has a “Stand Your Ground” bill on the books that makes it more difficult to prosecute people for killing someone if they claim “self-defense.”

    ALEC wants to bring more of these laws to your state. Here’s how they sum up what the bill does: “This act authorizes the use of force, including deadly force, against an intruder or attacker in a dwelling, residence, or vehicle under specified circumstances.” Many states already have have “stand your ground” laws.

    http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/9_appalling_gun_laws_backed_by_the_right_wing/

     

    Enhanced by Zemanta

  • NASA Stalks YOU

    We know the technological competence of NASA, though they will miss the terrorists and criminals.

    NASA
    NASA

    But you and me are easy meat to track.

    Read the following .

    “The following document comprises evidence for a lawsuit filed at the U.S. Courthouse in Washington, DC, by John St Clair Akwei against the National Security Agency, Ft George G. Meade, Maryland (Civil Action 92-0449), constitutes his knowledge of the NSA’s structure, national security activities proprietary technologies and covert operations to monitor individual citizens Ed.

    THE NSA’S MISSION AND DOMESTIC INTELLIGENCE OPERATION

    Communications Intelligence (COMINT)

    Blanket coverage of all electronic communications in the US and the world to ensure national security. The NSA at Ft Meade, Maryland has had the most advanced computers in the world since the early 1960s. NSA technology is developed and implemented in secret from private corporations, academia and the general public.

    Signals Intelligence (SIGINT)

    The Signals Intelligence mission of the NSA has evolved into a program of decoding EMF waves in the environment for wirelessly tapping into computers and track persons with the electrical currents in their bodies. Signals Intelligence is based on fact that everything in the environment with an electric current in it has a magnetic flux around it which gives off EMF waves. The NSA/DoD [Department of Defence] developed proprietary advanced digital equipment which can remotely analyze all objects whether manmade or organic, that have electrical activity.

    Domestic Intelligence (DOMINT)

    The NSA has records on all US citizens. The NSA gathers information on US citizen who might be of interest to any of the over 50,000 NSA agents (HUMINT). These agents are authorized by executive order to spy on anyone. The NSA has a permanent national security anti-terrorist surveillance network in place. This surveillance network is completely disguised and hidden from the public.
    Tracking individuals in the US is easily and cost-effectively implemented with NSA’s electronic surveillance network. This network (DOMINT) covers the entire US, involves tens of thousands of NSA personnel, and tracks millions of persons simultaneously . Cost-effective implementation of operations is assured by NSA computer technology designed to minimize operations costs. NSA personnel serve in quasi-public positions in their communities and run cover businesses and legitimate businesses that can inform the intelligence community of persons they would want to track. NSA personnel in the community usually have cover identities such as social workers, lawyers and business owners.

    Individual Citizens Occasionally Targeted for Surveillance by Independently Operating NSA Personnel

    NSA personnel can control the lives of hundreds of thousands of individuals in the US by using the NSA’s domestic intelligence network and cover businesses. The operations independently run by them can sometimes go beyond the bounds of law. Long-term control and sabotage of tens of thousands of unwitting citizens by NSA operatives is likely to happen. NSA DOMINT has the ability to assassinate US citizens covertly or run covert psychological control operations to cause subjects to be diagnosed with ill mental health.

    2. NSA’S DOMESTIC ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE NETWORK

    As of the early 1960s, the most advanced computers in the world were at the NSA, Ft Meade. Research breakthroughs with these computers were kept for the NSA. At the present time the NSA has nanotechnology computers that are 15 years ahead of present computer technology. The NSA obtains blanket coverage of information in the US by using advanced computers that use artificial intelligence to screen all communications, regardless of medium, for key words that should be brought to the attention of NSA agents/cryptologists. These computers monitor all communications at the transmitting and receiving ends. This blanket coverage of the US is a result of the NSA’s Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) mission. The NSA’s electronic surveillance network is based on a cellular arrangement of devices that can monitor the entire EMF spectrum. This equipment was developed, implemented and kept secret in the same manner as other electronic warfare programs.

    http://gangstalkingbelgium.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/domestic-surveillance-and-mind-control-technology/

     

  • Bush’s Torture Memo,Justified?

    George Bush and Dick Cheney
    George Bush and Cheney

    When a Government is engaged in fighting a war or against terrorism,it becomes impossible not to resort to third degree when a suspect is interrogated, in the larger interest of the country.
    But it is also possible that this is likely to be misused.
    As to the non provision of adequate protection in the Constitution against wrong judgements enough provision for Appeal have been provided..
    Judgements , in the final analysis are subjective and depends on the interpretation of the Law, which again is conditioned by one’s dispositions.
    In this case an action has been proposed and is rejected.
    This may mean anything, that the action has been contemplated or the establishment had been very humanitarian in rejecting the proposal.
    Ultimately every thing boils down to this-whether the individual has done what he had thought as Right with the available facts at that point of time.
    Civil Rights people forget that those affected/ killed by the accused also have Civil Rights.
    Society has a right to defend itself.

    Story:

    – A six-year-old memo from within the George W. Bush administration that came to light this week acknowledges that White House-approved interrogation techniques amounted to “war crimes.” The memo’s release has called attention to what has changed since President Barack Obama took office, but it also raises questions about what hasn’t.

    The Bush White House tried to destroy every copy of the memo, written by then-State Department counselor Philip Zelikow. Zelikow examined tactics like waterboarding — which simulates drowning — and concluded that there was no way they were legal, domestically or internationally.

    “We are unaware of any precedent in World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, or any subsequent conflict for authorized, systematic interrogation practices similar to those in question here,” Zelikow wrote. The memo has been obtained by George Washington University’s National Security Archive and Wired’s Spencer Ackerman.

    On his second full day in office, President Barack Obama formally disavowed torture,banning the types of techniques Zelikow had objected to so strongly in his memo.

    But while Democrats are using the memo as evidence of a new post-torture era under Obama, human rights activists, civil libertarians and opponents of excessive secrecy say they see many ways in which the country’s moral compass is still askew — and in some ways even more so than before.

    “If your baseline is the Bush years, it’s night and day,” said Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archive. “If your baselines are a set of first principles, as the ACLU calls for, or as us openness advocates call for, then your situation is: Is the glass half full or the glass half empty?”

    Obama has refused to pursue legal action against those who may have engaged in law-breaking under his predecessor’s watch — saying he prefers to “look forward instead of looking backward.” To some, this indicates there is little assurance that the U.S. won’t torture again in the future.

    “The administration has clearly disavowed torture, and that is an important and welcome thing,” said Jameel Jaffer, a national security expert at the American Civil Liberties Union.

    “But they’re steadily building a framework for impunity.”

    When it comes to issues like warrantless surveillance, “continuity is the rule and not the exception and in fact in some very important areas this administration has gone even farther than the Bush Administration did,” Jaffer said.

    Most alarming, says Jafeer, is the issue of the targeted killing of American citizenswho are terrorism suspects.

    Jaffer said the idea that the government can mark an American for death without any judicial oversight is something the framers of the Constitution “would have found totally foreign to the project they were engaged in.”

    “I think there are many Democrats out there who are quiet because they trust President Obama,” Jaffer said. But, he added, “there’s no doubt that the power we’re giving President Obama will be available to a future president.”

    Jaffer noted that another way things may be worse today than during the Bush era is that at least back then, many people thought things would change dramatically once Bush left office, and that his actions wouldn’t establish legal precedents.

    “We didn’t worry so much about that because the Bush Administration was seen as an outlier and an aberration, and the Bush precedent wouldn’t have been seen as weighty,” Jaffer said.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/06/torture-memo-bush_n_1408612.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

  • SOPA-Senseless.Web page under SOPA and Text of the Bill..

    World wide web
    Image via Wikipedia

    Stop On-line Piracy Act is , to say the least is idiotic ,impractical and seems to have been designed at the behest of Corporations to safeguard their interests.

    SOPA is impractical as it is not possible to differentiate between original content and the pirated one, short of blocking the sites.

    Blocking of sites on the basis of perceived copy right issues is difficult as even Quotes from the original will be closed down.

    Those who really infringe copy right act will continue to go about under the guise of ‘quoting’

    It is all a question of interpretation.

    Being impractical ,it becomes idiotic.

    Do Shakespeare,History Books ,Text Books,Literature,Science papers of general importance,even for that matter News…qualify to be called Copy Righted?

    While the Corporations manoeuvre  to have the bill passed, what is at stake is the individual Freedom of Expression.

    Wiki leaks,Wikipedia,Wired.com,Reddit, Firefox are among others of the internet community to take the fight to the Capitol Hill.

    Time that this non sense is put an end to protect freedom of Expression,fie the greedy corporations,whose perceived losses on account of Online piracy is a pittance compared with the astronomical profits they have.

    Care must be excised to avoid piracy as it amounts to eating what one has spit out.”

    See the Link as to how the web will look like  if the SPOA comes into force.

    I suggest, instead of  closing sites to show our disapproval,we write more, say 5 pieces per Blogger on SOPA, to register out protest, signifying that Word can not be suppressed.

    “http://thehackernews.com/2012/01/indian-bjp-politicians-bank-accounts.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheHackersNews+%28The+Hackers+News+-+Daily+Cyber+News+Updates%29

    When the powerful world of old media mobilized to win passage of an online antipiracy bill, it marshaled the reliable giants of K Street — the United States Chamber of Commerce, the Recording Industry Association of America and, of course, the motion picture lobby, with its new chairman, former SenatorChristopher J. Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat and an insider’s insider.

    Yet on Wednesday this formidable old guard was forced to make way for the new as Web powerhouses backed by Internet activists rallied opposition to the legislation through Internet blackouts and cascading criticism, sending an unmistakable message to lawmakers grappling with new media issues: Don’t mess with the Internet.

    As a result, the legislative battle over two once-obscure bills to combat the piracy of American movies, music, books and writing on the World Wide Web may prove to be a turning point for the way business is done in Washington. It represented a moment when the new economy rose up against the old.

    “I think it is an important moment in the Capitol,” said Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California and an important opponent of the legislation. “Too often, legislation is about competing business interests. This is way beyond that. This is individual citizens rising up.”

    It appeared by Wednesday evening that Congress would follow Bank of America, Netflix and Verizon as the latest institution to change course in the face of a netizen revolt.

    Legislation that just weeks ago had overwhelming bipartisan support and had provoked little scrutiny generated a grass-roots coalition on the left and the right. Wikipedia made its English-language content unavailable, replaced with a warning: “Right now, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open Internet.” Visitors to Reddit found the site offline in protest. Google’s home page was scarred by a black swatch that covered the search engine’s label.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/technology/web-protests-piracy-bill-and-2-key-senators-change-course.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2

    SOPA Text.

    ”

    H.R.3261

    Stop Online Piracy Act (Introduced in House – IH)

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

      (a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the `Stop Online Piracy Act’.
      (b) Table of Contents- The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
      Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
      Sec. 2. Savings and severability clauses.

    TITLE I–COMBATING ONLINE PIRACY

      Sec. 101. Definitions.
      Sec. 102. Action by Attorney General to protect U.S. customers and prevent U.S. support of foreign infringing sites.
      Sec. 103. Market-based system to protect U.S. customers and prevent U.S. funding of sites dedicated to theft of U.S. property.
      Sec. 104. Immunity for taking voluntary action against sites dedicated to theft of U.S. property.
      Sec. 105. Immunity for taking voluntary action against sites that endanger public health.
      Sec. 106. Guidelines and study.
      Sec. 107. Denying U.S. capital to notorious foreign infringers.

    TITLE II–ADDITIONAL ENHANCEMENTS TO COMBAT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT

      Sec. 201. Streaming of copyrighted works in violation of criminal law.
      Sec. 202. Trafficking in inherently dangerous goods or services.
      Sec. 203. Protecting U.S. businesses from foreign and economic espionage.
      Sec. 204. Amendments to sentencing guidelines.
      Sec. 205. Defending intellectual property rights abroad.

    SEC. 2. SAVINGS AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSES.

      (a) Savings Clauses-
      (1) FIRST AMENDMENT- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impose a prior restraint on free speech or the press protected under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.
      (2) TITLE 17 LIABILITY- Nothing in title I shall be construed to enlarge or diminish liability, including vicarious or contributory liability, for any cause of action available under title 17, United States Code, including any limitations on liability under such title.
      (b) Severability- If any provision of this Act, or the application of the provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the other provisions or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

    TITLE I–COMBATING ONLINE PIRACY

    SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.

      In this title:
      (1) DOMAIN NAME- The term `domain name’ has the meaning given that term in section 45 of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1127) and includes any subdomain designation using such domain name as part of an electronic address on the Internet to identify a unique online location.
      (2) DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM SERVER- The term `domain name system server’ means a server or other mechanism used to provide the Internet protocol address associated with a domain name.
      (3) DOMESTIC DOMAIN NAME- The term `domestic domain name’ means a domain name that is registered or assigned by a domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration authority, that is located within a judicial district of the United States.
      (4) DOMESTIC INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS- The term `domestic Internet Protocol address’ means an Internet Protocol address for which the corresponding Internet Protocol allocation entity is located within a judicial district of the United States.
      (5) DOMESTIC INTERNET SITE- The term `domestic Internet site’ means an Internet site for which the corresponding domain name or, if there is no domain name, the corresponding Internet Protocol address, is a domestic domain name or domestic Internet Protocol address.
      (6) FOREIGN DOMAIN NAME- The term `foreign domain name’ means a domain name that is not a domestic domain name.
      (7) FOREIGN INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS- The term `foreign Internet Protocol address’ means an Internet Protocol address that is not a domestic Internet protocol address.
      (8) FOREIGN INTERNET SITE- The term `foreign Internet site’ means an Internet site that is not a domestic Internet site.
      (9) INCLUDING- The term `including’ means including, but not limited to.
      (10) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENFORCEMENT COORDINATOR- The term `Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator’ means the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator appointed under section 301 of the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008 (15 U.S.C. 8111).
      (11) INTERNET- The term `Internet’ has the meaning given that term in section 5362(5) of title 31, United States Code.
      (12) INTERNET ADVERTISING SERVICE- The term `Internet advertising service’ means a service that for compensation sells, purchases, brokers, serves, inserts, verifies, clears, or otherwise facilitates the placement of an advertisement, including a paid or sponsored search result, link, or placement, that is rendered in viewable form for any period of time on an Internet site.
      (13) INTERNET PROTOCOL- The term `Internet Protocol’ means a protocol used for communicating data across a packet-switched internetwork using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, and includes any predecessor or successor protocol to such protocol.
      (14) INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS- The term `Internet Protocol address’ means a numerical label that is assigned to each device that participates in a computer network that uses the Internet Protocol for communication.
      (15) INTERNET PROTOCOL ALLOCATION ENTITY- The term `Internet Protocol allocation entity’ means, with respect to a particular Internet Protocol address, the entity, local internet registry, or regional internet registry to which the smallest applicable block of Internet Protocol addresses containing that address is allocated or assigned by a local internet registry, regional internet registry, or other Internet Protocol address allocation authority, according to the applicable publicly available database of allocations and assignments, if any.
      (16) INTERNET SEARCH ENGINE- The term `Internet search engine’ means a service made available via the Internet that searches, crawls, categorizes, or indexes information or Web sites available elsewhere on the Internet and on the basis of a user query or selection that consists of terms, concepts, categories, questions, or other data returns to the user a means, such as a hyperlinked list of Uniform Resource Locators, of locating, viewing, or downloading such information or data available on the Internet relating to such query or selection.
      (17) INTERNET SITE- The term `Internet site’ means the collection of digital assets, including links, indexes, or pointers to digital assets, accessible through the Internet that are addressed relative to a common domain name or, if there is no domain name, a common Internet Protocol address.
      (18) LANHAM ACT- The term `Lanham Act’ means the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the registration and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and for other purposes’, approved July 5, 1946 (commonly referred to as the `Trademark Act of 1946′ or the `Lanham Act’).
      (19) NONAUTHORITATIVE DOMAIN NAME SERVER- The term `nonauthoritative domain name server’ means a server that does not contain complete copies of domains but uses a cache file that is comprised of previous domain name server lookups, for which the server has received an authoritative response in the past.
      (20) OWNER; OPERATOR- The terms `owner’ or `operator’, when used in connection with an Internet site, includes, respectively, any owner of a majority interest in, or any person with authority to operate, such Internet site.
      (21) PAYMENT NETWORK PROVIDER-
      (A) IN GENERAL- The term `payment network provider’ means an entity that directly or indirectly provides the proprietary services, infrastructure, and software to effect or facilitate a debit, credit, or other payment transaction.
      (B) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- For purposes of this paragraph, a depository institution (as such term is defined under section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act) or credit union that initiates a payment transaction shall not be construed to be a payment network provider based solely on the offering or provision of such service.
      (22) SERVICE PROVIDER- The term `service provider’ means a service provider as defined in section 512(k)(1) of title 17, United States Code, that operates a nonauthoritative domain name system server.
      (23) U.S.-DIRECTED SITE- The term `U.S.-directed site’ means an Internet site or portion thereof that is used to conduct business directed to residents of the United States, or that otherwise demonstrates the existence of minimum contacts sufficient for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the owner or operator of the Internet site consistent with the Constitution of the United States, based on relevant evidence that may include whether–
      (A) the Internet site is used to provide goods or services to users located in the United States;
      (B) there is evidence that the Internet site or portion thereof is intended to offer or provide–
      (i) such goods and services,
      (ii) access to such goods and services, or
      (iii) delivery of such goods and services,
      to users located in the United States;
      (C) the Internet site or portion thereof does not contain reasonable measures to prevent such goods and services from being obtained in or delivered to the United States; and
      (D) any prices for goods and services are indicated or billed in the currency of the United States.
      (24) UNITED STATES- The term `United States’ includes any commonwealth, possession, or territory of the United States

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112s5p8Nc:e1014:

    Related articles