Montclair State Unveils Mandatory 'School Phone'

Students Must Carry And Pay For GPS-Based Cell Device

Reporting
Jay Dow

MONTCLAIR, N.J. (CBS) ― College students at Montclair State University are all talking about a new requirement that will require students to have a cell phone.

CBS 2 HD has learned more on this required feature that is forcing students to dig into their wallets.

At Montclair State, there is no excuse for being out of touch.

"'School Phone' I use for campus e-mail, different things like that," freshman Angela Vuocolo said.

That's right.

First-year student Vuocolo said 'School Phone' -- as in a Sprint-operated cell phone -- is now mandatory for all students. It's the first program of its kind in the country.

The cost: $420 a year for a base plan which is bundled into the tuition bill.

It includes just 50 peak voice minutes a month, but unlimited text messaging to any carrier, unlimited campus-based data usage, and student activated emergency GPS tracking.

"What it does is allow students to have an extra pair or group of people watching over them when they're going from one location to another," Montclair Police Department Chief Paul Cell said.

The positive impact is already being felt across campus.

"It makes me feel comfortable," MSU freshman Ricky Bodtmann said. "I guess if people want to feel safe."

Added student Vanessa Adames: "It's very helpful. I have the train schedule on there. I can check my e-mail."

There are various phone and call plan options, but the bottom line is you have to pick one. That could be a problem for someone with their own cell phone and their own monthly bill.

"I don't see why they should be adding unnecessary fees to the students who have a hard time paying for college like I do," freshman Sury Lopez said.

One mother agrees.

"It's very expensive and quite honestly for the protection of the kids on campus the school should be giving that for free," Patty Carragh said.

University officials say the school doesn't profit from the deal.

"If you're mobile accessing the campus from anywhere with some device that's attached to your hip, the truth of the matter is, you're also avoiding a lot of costs," said Ed Chapel, Montclair State vice president of information technology.

The program has another benefit -- students now have another way to call home and ask for money.

This year Farleigh Dickinson University also began a mandatory cell phone program, but the school picked up the cost for all of its on-campus student residents.

Video of this report

FEMA CALLS FOUNDING FATHERS TERRORISTS

This video from the http://jonesreport.com/
July 2001 FEMA training meeting in Oklahoma where a FEMA representative was caught on video instructing local police that the American people were the enemy and that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and the rest of the founding fathers were a terrorist organization. At the end of the video the instructor says if 10,000 civilians are killed with a bio weapon that's to bad for them.

FEMA really cares huh? Makes me feel all cozy to know they are now part of Homeland Security.

Extreme Heat brought down building 7. yea right!

http://www.jonesreport.com/
Lee Hamilton the former Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission admits that the WTC 7 issue has "not been finally resolved" and that other questions about the attack will linger on, before stating that he did not believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11.

Powell: Iran far from nuclear weapon

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/powell_iran_1

US military accuses AP photographer of being "terrorist media operative"

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=071120034615.7crpsb43&show_article=1

Habeas Corpus anyone?

Award winning photographer held for 19 months with out charges.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8T12BC03&show_article=1

Hillary Confirms Bill attended Bilderberg meeting

Full List of people in attendance at 2006 Bilderberg meeting

http://www.infowars.com/images2/nwo/bilderberg/bbg_list_page_01.jpg

http://www.infowars.com/images2/nwo/bilderberg/bbg_list_page_02.jpg

http://www.infowars.com/images2/nwo/bilderberg/bbg_list_page_03.jpg

http://www.infowars.com/images2/nwo/bilderberg/bbg_list_page_04.jpg

http://www.infowars.com/images2/nwo/bilderberg/bbg_list_page_05.jpg

http://www.infowars.com/images2/nwo/bilderberg/bbg_list_page_06.jpg

Fox News Hosts fundraiser for Hillary

Can you say new world order?
Here are a few articles showing Rupert Murdoch owner of FoxNews hosting Fundraisers For Hillary Clinton:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/09/politics/main1600694.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/may2006/murd-m10.shtml
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/6/15/232033.shtml
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/11/164938.shtml
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12762092/
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016342.html
There are more!
In This video Clip Sean Hannity cheerleader for the Neo Cons approached by truthers.

US intelligence official: You get privacy when your definition matches ours

By Ken Fisher Published: November 11, 2007 - 04:30PM CT
Donald Kerr, a top intelligence official with the US government, says that citizens need to change their definition of privacy to match the government's definition, the AP reports. Appointed Director of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) in 2005, Kerr is now the principal deputy director of national intelligence. Kerr is one of many in the intelligence community who finds Americans' views on privacy to be antiquated and unreasonable.
Kerr echoes the view that privacy is not synonymous with anonymity. Americans who want to see anonymity at the center of privacy policies need to give up this notion, he says. "Too often, privacy has been equated with anonymity; and it's an idea that is deeply rooted in American culture... but in our interconnected and wireless world, anonymity - or the appearance of anonymity - is quickly becoming a thing of the past," Kerr said according to a PDF transcript of his comments.
Americans need to shift their definition of privacy to center instead on the proper maintenance and protection of personal data by government and business entities. Kerr said that "privacy, I would offer, is a system of laws, rules, and customs with an infrastructure of Inspectors General, oversight committees, and privacy boards on which our intelligence community commitment is based and measured. And it is that framework that we need to grow and nourish and adjust as our cultures change."
Kerr also tackled the "common thinking that, in order to have more safety, you get less privacy." Kerr argues that "you need to have both... You can be perfectly safe in a prison; but you certainly aren't free. And you can be perfectly free in an anarchist society; but you certainly aren't safe."
The problem, according to Kerr's line of thought, isn't that government and businesses may have intricately detailed information about citizens, or that they might be actively working to collect such data as part of an extensive program of electronic surveillance. The concerns, Kerr says, should be focused on how such data is safeguarded and how Americans view the importance of that data.
Kerr's comments come at a time when the US government is trying to address objections over the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act. In particular, the question is whether or not telecommunications companies deserve immunity for their involvement in illegal wiretapping beginning in 2001. Kerr seems to be saying, hey guys, what they did isn't bad at all, you should be impressed how secret it all was, really.
Proponents of increased surveillance, like Kerr, have high estimations of the government's ability to safeguard sensitive data, though the sentiment is not shared by all. It's hard to have too much confidence when the FBI is busy losing laptops and the nature of such programs appears to be one involving little oversight from independent branches of government.
It's cliché, but Benjamin Franklin long ago warned against rhetoric that demands trading individual rights for corporate security. Asking Americans to greenlight extensive, unchecked electronic surveillance by changing their very definition of privacy is a prime example of such rhetoric.
Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said "It's just another 'trust us, we're the government'" argument.

NJ School Cameras Fed Live to Cops

What's next our homes? Work place? Has anyone read 1984 (Orwell)?

Surveillance cameras rolling inside our local schools is nothing new, but what’s taking place inside Demarest’s public schools is truly cutting edge: a live feed from more than two dozen cameras with a direct connection to the police.
It’s an expensive, but effective tool that could be a sign of the times with an increase in school shootings over the years.
The system, which cost about $28,000, can even track movement in a crowded room.
“When they arrive, they can pull up the school’s live feed and do a sweep instantly,” Demarest Police Chief James Powderley tells CBS 2.
Patrolling officers have access to the video feed from headquarters and several laptops.

New SF ID cards for residents - whether in the country legally or not

Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 13, 2007

The Board of Supervisors voted today to make San Francisco the largest U.S. city to issue municipal identification cards to its residents, regardless of whether or not they are in the country legally.
Supervisor Tom Ammiano, the legislation's author, said the availability of identification cards is a smart public safety measure because it would make residents living on the social margins of San Francisco more likely to seek the help of police and could give them more access to banking services.
"People are afraid to report crimes," Ammiano said, referring to illegal immigrants who avoid local law enforcement authorities over fear of being arrested or deported by federal immigration officials.
The legislation would require companies doing business with San Francisco to accept the municipal card as a legitimate form of identification - except in cases where other state and federal laws require other forms of proof of age, name and residence.
Under San Francisco's sanctuary ordinance, it already is city policy that no municipal government personnel or resources may be used to assist federal immigration officials in the arrest and deportation of illegal immigrants.
Ammiano said banking institutions in San Francisco have signaled their willingness to accept the municipal ID card for the purpose of setting up accounts. He noted that people without bank accounts are frequently more vulnerable to theft and robbery.
The legislation, which was approved 10-1 on the first of two readings, has the support of Mayor Gavin Newsom. Supervisor Sean Elsbernd voted against the measure, noting afterward that his opposition was primarily financial in that the city doesn't know how much implementing the program will cost.
The city of New Haven, Conn., began issuing municipal identification cards earlier this year.
Supporters of tougher enforcement of U.S. immigration laws argue that local identification card programs have the effect of legitimizing the decisions of people who entered or have remained in the country illegally and make it more difficult for the federal government to enforce those laws.
E-mail Wyatt Buchanan at wbuchanan@sfchronicle.com.

Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty Would Give the UN Control Over Everything About the Oceans

JBS November 9, 2007 Larry Greenley
The Senate is poised to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), which would give total regulatory jurisdiction over the world's oceans and seas to a United Nations body, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Follow this link to the original source: "25th Anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea"
On October 31 the authoritative Capitol Hill news publication, CQ Today, stated:
The Senate is likely to ratify a 1982 U.N. treaty governing the use of the world's oceans despite grumbling from a few conservative GOP senators.
That's right. After 25 years of stalemate, the Senate is poised to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), which would give total regulatory jurisdiction over the world's oceans and seas to a United Nations body, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
This is the same UN famous for its corrupt oil-for-food scandal. This is the organization that consistently votes against American interests.
In order to understand just how comprehensive and sweeping are the powers over the oceans that LOST would confer on the UN, read what was said at an official UN celebration of the 25th anniversary of LOST on Oct. 17:
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ... is perhaps one of the most significant but less recognized 20th century accomplishments in the arena of international law.... Its scope is vast: it covers all ocean space, with all its uses, including navigation and overflight; all uses of all its resources, living and non-living, on the high seas, on the ocean floor and beneath, on the continental shelf and in the territorial seas; the protection of the marine environment; and basic law and order.... The Convention is widely recognised by the international community as the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and the seas must be carried out. (" 25th Anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ," Oct. 17, 2007; emphasis added.)
In short, the LOST treaty provides the legal framework within which all activities on, over and under the oceans and the seas must be carried out. In other words, the LOST treaty would give the UN jurisdiction over everything concerning the oceans and seas of the earth.
Everything would certainly include military and commercial uses of the oceans and seas. How do you think the anti-American UN would rule on U.S. Air Force planes and U.S. Navy ships using the oceans for military purposes? What would this mean for our national security? How about our commercial airliners flying over the oceans? How about the necessary transportation between our mainland states and Hawaii? And, on and on.
We would not have veto power protection in the UN's International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea like we do in the Security Council. We'd have one vote among a membership of over 150 nations.
For confirmation of just how bad it would be for the Senate to ratify LOST, take a look at these two videos of recent Senate hearings, featuring one of LOST's most articulate critics, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.): (1) DeMint on Law of the Sea Treaty: Part 1 ; (2) Round 2: DeMint on Law of the Sea Treaty.
This vote on LOST is arguably the most important vote the Senate will cast this year. The John Birch Society is urging its members and allies, especially the leaders and members of other organizations that also believe in preserving American sovereignty and security, to phone their senators within the next few days in opposition to the LOST treaty. Click here for a link to your senators' phone numbers and talking points for the calls.
If enough Americans contact their senators, we can stop LOST just like we stopped amnesty back in June. However, fewer organizations are involved in this fight, so those of us who understand the long range threat posed by surrendering our sovereignty to the UN need to step up our activism and get the job done!
Our personal freedom and security depend on preserving American sovereignty and security by winning this fight against LOST!

ENDGAME- ALEX JONES - Blueprint for Global Enslavement

Please watch this. Alex does a great job of exposing the NEW WORLD ORDER.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261&q=alex+jones+endgame&pr=goog-sl