Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 9/11 Truth, Airport Security, Alex Jones, alternative media, anti-abortion, Anti-War, Big Brother, bill of rights, blackops, bob barr, brain manipulation, campaign for liberty, chuck baldwin, civil disobedience, civil liberties, civil rights, Conditioning, Control Grid, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, DoD, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Echelon, Empire, fake alqaeda, Fascism, FBI, Founding Fathers, free speech, Homeland Security, Martial Law, MIAC report, militarization, Military, nanny state, Nazi, New World Order, NWO, Oppression, orwell, patriot movement, Police State, Posse Comitatus, precrime, Propaganda, Protest, Psyops, Ron Paul, stasi, stasi tactics, terror drill, thought crime, Troops, truth movement, US Constitution, us military, War On Terror
Troops And Police Take On Protesters in “Anti-Terrorism” Drill
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
September 4, 2009
Soldiers teamed up with police at Fort Lee, Virginia this week for a three day long “anti-terrorism drill” that involved defending themselves from actors playing the part of “agitated” protesters.
A report from CBS affiliate WTVR provides details of the drill, which centered on containing and quelling a staged demonstration.
The volunteer protesters held aloft signs, one of which declared a “racist free zone” (see opposite, click to enlarge).
“We train our solders as realistically as we can, to protect for us as a garrison, other soldiers and families on the post” Fort Lee’s Garrison Commander Colonel Mike Morrow told reporters.
Combining active duty soldiers with civilian police has taken weeks of planning according to the report. The drill involved “all aspects of protecting of the military installation whether its protesters or terrorists.”
Fort Lee Chief of Police Joe Metzger told WTVR that in times of emergency the military and the police must work together. “We forget one’s wearing blue, one’s wearing a uniform. We all come together for the same cause”. Metzger stated.
Apparently that cause involves the prevention of people exercising their First Amendment rights.
One participating soldier was quoted as saying “I learned over here we also have missions back in the US to protect our families and friends and this is a part of doing so”.
It has been the case for a number of years now that the police and the armed forces are being trained, in this case TOGETHER, to treat protesting US citizens as a threat to security.
Now it is clear that the American people are the classed on same threat level as “terrorists” by the military and the police. Why else would such an exercise be part of an “anti-terrorism” drill?
Back in June we covered the news that current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the US constitutes terrorist activity.
The ACLU wrote a letter of protest to the DoD regarding its Antiterrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course, which advises personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism”. All DoD personnel are required to complete the course on a yearly basis.
Over the last few years we have also seen countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists.
The latest evidence of such training was sent to us last week in the form of a 2006 FBI training video produced as part of a program to train police how to spot and apprehend terrorists.
The “terrorists” in the presentation were people carrying video equipment, cell phones and sleeping bags in their cars, along with people taking photographs of structures.
Watch Alex Jones’ breakdown of the training video below (begins at 6.20 mins):
Filed under: 1st amendment, activists, Alex Jones, anarchists, Big Banks, Black Bloc, Credit Crisis, DEBT, deflation, Dollar, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Economic Collapse, economic depression, Economy, end the fed, Federal Reserve, Founding Fathers, free speech, g20, global economy, gold standard, gold standard currency, Great Depression, Greenback, Hegelian Dialectic, hyperinflation, Inflation, miac, MIAC report, missouri, Ordo Ab Chao, peaceful protesters, Posse Comitatus, private bank, Problem Reaction Solution, Protest, Provocateurs, Stock Market, Troops, US Constitution, US Economy, Wall Street, WTO
Provocateurs At End The Fed Rally?
“Anarchists” tried to get protesters to commit crimes
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
September 1, 2009
According to testimony given at a Missouri House of Representatives meeting yesterday, anarchists attempted to get other protesters to commit criminal acts during the End the Fed protests late last year, in what was a possible attempt to instigate chaos to justify a harsh crackdown on behalf of the authorities.
In March it came to light that the End the Fed protests, which took place at banks and regional Federal Reserve branches across the country on November 22, were being monitored closely by the United States Army Reserve Command, who implied that those protesting against the Fed and the bankster bailout were essentially terrorists.
On November 22, 2008, Alex Jones led a rally at the Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas Texas. The Dallas protest is specifically mentioned in the official Army document. Ron Paul’s brother was also in attendance.
During testimony given in response to the infamous Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report, a document authored by Missouri Highway Patrol and distributed to fellow law enforcement agencies that characterizes Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display political bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag as potential domestic terrorists, one of the organizers who attended the protests said that “anarchists” attempted to recruit followers and encouraged them to commit illegal acts.
“My group was at the End the Fed rally and there were a bunch of different groups there,” Cisse Spragin told the Missouri House of Representatives on Monday. “And there was this group of anarchists who started talking to us. And then they tried to recruit us or have us join their group. Then they started telling us what should we should write on our signs, and insisting on letting them re-write some of our signs. Later we overheard them saying they couldn’t even get us to jaywalk.”
Spragin’s testimony suggests that the anarchists were attempting to steer the nature of the protests in the opposite direction to guidelines published by End the Fed rally organizers before the protests which called for “Cooperation and respect for local laws and authorities,” and “No blocking of pedestrian or vehicular traffic.”
This wouldn’t be the first time that anarchist groups have been used as a tool with which to stir chaos. As we have documented before, the black bloc anarchist groups are routinely infiltrated and steered by authorities who use them to provoke disorder as a pretext to crack down on legitimate demonstrators.
During the April 2009 G20 summit in London, police stood back and watched anarchists attack banks and other buildings in an incident that had all the hallmarks of a staged event.
Following the SPP protests in Canada in 2007, Quebec provincial authorities were forced to admit that three rock-wielding black mask-wearing “anarchists” were in fact police infiltrators used to gather information on protesters.
Video shows two of the provocateurs pick up rocks and try to incite violence before they are outed as cops by legitimate demonstrators. The two thugs then tried to slip behind police lines before their fellow officers were forced to stage their arrest. Again, the fact that they were cops in disguise was later admitted by authorities. Watch the video.
Alex Jones’ film Police State 2: The Takeover exposed how the black bloc anarchists were completely infiltrated and provocateured by the authorities during the violent 1999 WTO protests in Seattle.
The authorities declared a state of emergency, imposed curfews and resorted to nothing short of police state tactics in response to a small minority of hostile black bloc hooligans. Police allowed the black bloc to run riot in downtown Seattle while they concentrated on preventing the movement of peaceful protestors. The film presents clear evidence that the black bloc anarchist group was actually controlled by the state and used to demonize peaceful protesters. Watch the video below.
At the WTO protests in Genoa 2001 a protestor was killed after being shot in the head and run over twice by a police vehicle. The Italian Carabinere also later beat on peaceful protestors as they slept, and even tortured some, at the Diaz School. It later emerged that the police fabricated evidence against the protesters, claiming they were anarchist rioters, to justify their actions. Some Carabiniere officials have since come forward to say they knew of infiltration of the so called black bloc anarchists, and that fellow officers acted as agent provocateurs.
At the Free Trade Area of Americas protests in Miami in late November 2003, more provocateuring was evident. The United Steelworkers of America calling for a congressional investigation, stated that the police intentionally caused violence and arrested and charged hundreds of peaceful protestors.
Filed under: Airport Security, Big Brother, DHS, Dictatorship, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, eric holder, Fascism, Founding Fathers, government control, government regulations, Homeland Security, nanny state, Nazi, no-fly list, Oppression, orwell, Police State, stasi, stasi tactics, TSA, War On Terror | Tags: Secure Flight
Government Permission Will Be Required To Travel
You are NOT free to move about the country…
Rense
August 20, 2009
Starting this year, Americans will have to get government approval to travel by air. As Privacy Journal revealed last fall, henceforth “Permission Now Needed to Travel Within U.S.” Getting a reservation and checking-in for air travel will soon require Transportation Security Administration authorization. That permission is by no means assured: For example, if your name matches a “no-fly” list, even mistakenly, you can be denied the right to a reserve a seat on a flight. If your name is on a “selectee” list, you and your possessions will be searched more thoroughly before you can board. What is going on here?
Protecting air safety is essential, but professional screening at airports already provides for it. Giving the TSA as an official agency the additional authority to decide who gets to go where reaches beyond safety into overextended governmental power. This newly minted “Secure Flight” rule fundamentally imbalances long-standing citizens’ rights both to travel and to be left alone. If your name appears among hundreds of thousands on “watchlists,” you assert that the government should not require ID to fly, you don’t want to reveal your date of birth for concern about identity theft, or you don’t choose to declare your gender, you can stay home.
By combining the requirement for government photo IDs in order to fly with checking government watchlists including potentially every passenger, “Secure Flight” puts the federal government into the business of licensing travel. All travelers will need government OK in order to board a flight, or take a cruise. What the government can allow one day, it can forbid the next. All things considered, isn’t this a higher-tech and later-day version of South African domestic passports or eastern European checkpoints? In fact, because of the high technological capacity of the U.S. version, aren’t its implications for travel control of plane, train, bus and subway travel much more far reaching? It’s incredible that something like this is happening relatively unrecognized in America.
While some people consider the requirement to show ID or reveal a birth date a small trade-off for security, what is at stake here is the right to travel. That fundamental freedom of movement appears in the Articles of Confederation in the right to freely enter and leave all the states of the then small union. It was so fundamentally a part of American citizenship that the privileges and immunities clauses of the Constitution included it without explicitly mentioning it again for the more perfect union. With a large and expansive nation now ranging from Hawaii and Alaska to Washington DC, that right to travel nationally, and petition the distant government, is even more fundamental. Yet some courts maintain that if you can walk, you don’t need the right to fly. People have the right to walk around freely without carrying a national ID; why do they have to show one to travel? The Supreme Court has yet to rule on the scope of the right to travel but lower courts have tended to restrict it more narrowly than the Founding Fathers would approve.
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2-party system, 2008 Election, 2nd Amendment, Airport Security, Alex Jones, anti gun, Barack Obama, BATF, Big Brother, CIFTA, DHS, Dictatorship, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, eric holder, Fascism, firearms, Founding Fathers, free speech, global elite, gun ammo, gun confiscation, Gun Control, gun control treaty, Gun Owners, h.r. 2159, handgun ban, handguns, Homeland Security, House, hr 2159, HR 45, kentucky, nanny state, Nazi, Neolibs, obama, Oppression, orwell, patriot movement, Police State, Ruby Ridge, Senate, stasi, stasi tactics, stimulus bill, TSA, US Constitution, Waco, War On Terror, Washington D.C. | Tags: d.c. handgun ban, National Instant Criminal Background Check System, no fly no buy act, Tobacco and Firearms
Total Gun Control Under Obama Administration
Noworldsystem.com / Infowars.com
May 24, 2009
We are witnessing the last vestiges of freedom vanish before our very eyes, 3 bills have been introduced to the House that will completely lock-down the 2nd amendment for good. The U.S. Government has the 1st and 2nd amendment by the throat, if any of these Orwellian bills pass the Senate we will see the last chapter of the American Republic.
Democratic Congressman Bobby Rush introduced “Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009” (HR 45) which will create a federal licensure system of gun owners who must fill out an application that includes a photo, address, all previous aliases, thumb print and will make all buyers undergo a mental health screening in order own a “Blair Holt” gun license. The bill gives U.S. Attorney General complete power over who gets permission to obtain a gun license, those who have permission will be required to unload the firearms and lock them up in gun safes, thus completely rendering the owner from using the gun for self-defense.
H.R. 45 will also make it illegal for a licensed gun owner to fail to report a missing gun or theft within 72 hours or fail to report a change of address within 60 days. If a minor obtains a firearm and injures someone with it, the owner of the gun will face a multiple-year jail sentence. [Source]
Another anti-gun bill introduced by House Democrat Carolyn McCarthy called the “No Fly, No Buy Act” (HR 2401), if passed the Senate it will merge the TSA’s no-fly list with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), a point-of-sale system that determines the customer’s eligibility to purchase a firearm in the United States. The NICS was created in November of 1993 when the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act) was signed into law. The permanent provisions of the Brady Act went into effect on November 30, 1998 and required the U.S. Attorney General to establish NICS.
H.R. 2401 sponsor, Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy stressed the importance of passing the No Fly No Buy Act, saying: “For far too long, the terror gap has left a wide open loophole in our nation’s gun safety laws that could allow terrorists to acquire guns the same way any law abiding citizen can. The No Fly, No Buy Act uses existing TSA data to update the NICS system with the names of known or suspected terrorists to disqualify them from passing the Brady Background Check. This is a common sense gun bill that will prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands,”. Co-sponsor of the bill, Steve Israel agrees with her sentiment, stressing “the importance of keeping guns out of the hands of people that are known or suspected terrorists”. [Source]
On May 15, 2007, former Congressman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) now Obama’s Chief of Staff, speaks at DC’s annual “Stand Up For a Safe America” event sponsored by the Brady Center. Emanuel is quoted saying that we need a president that will “make sure we have once again an assault weapon ban, a Brady Bill with a full force of the law of the land,” “if you are on the No-Fly List because you are known as maybe a possible terrorist; you cannot buy a handgun in America.” “If you’re on that No-Fly List, your access to the right to bear arms is cancelled because you’re not part of the American family, you don’t deserve that right, there is no right for you if you’re on that terrorist list.”
There is over one million Americans on TSA’s no-fly database and the list continues to grow at an astronomical rate. These people are not Islamic terrorists this War on Terror fraud would make you believe, these are Americans, people like Sen. Ted Kennedy, CNN reporter Drew Griffin and even an 8-year old child!
Another recent bill that will give the A.G. complete control titled the “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009” (HR 2159) to the House Committee on Judiciary. The bill would “increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.”.
Executive director of Gun Owners of America, Larry Pratt is worried that this bill will be used in correlation with Homeland Security’s domestic terrorism memos that label the alternative news media, returning veterans, activists in support of the Constitution, Gun Rights, activists against the Iraq war, illegal immigration or the New World Order as potential terrorists.
Pratt says, “This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists. Actually, we could rename this bill the Janet Napolitano Frenzied Fantasy Implementation Act of 2009.” Obama’s Attorney General pick Eric Holder is rabidly anti-gun, during his tenure with the Clinton administration he aimed at driving the nation’s gun dealers and manufacturers out of business. [Source] If any of these anti-gun bills pass it will give Eric Holder absolute power on who gets to own guns, these bills have absolutely nothing to do with stopping Islamic terrorism but all to do about oppressing the American people.
After 9/11, Eric Holder wrote a Washington Post op-ed titled “Keeping Guns Away From Terrorists” arguing that a new law should give the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) a record of every gun sale. He also stated that potential gun buyers should be checked against the secret “watch lists” compiled by various government entities. To strengthen his point he concluded that Osama Bin Laden would be able to purchase unregistered firearms at American gun shows if these measures were not met.
This year, Second Amendment attorney Stephen Halbrook during Attorney General Eric Holder’s confirmation hearing made it clear that Eric Holder is vehemently opposed to the right of the American people to bear arms. Unfortunately there was no mention of Holder’s role in the Waco and the Ruby Ridge massacre during his Clinton tenure.:
Obama and his administration will most likely obliterate the 2nd amendment with staunch anti-gun creatures like Rahm Emanuel and Eric Holder. Lou Dobbs just recently reported that Obama is in favor of ratifying CIFTA, an International Gun-Control Treaty that prevents ‘illicit’ manufacturing of firearms, ammunition and explosive materials. According to Gun Owners of America ‘illicit’ manufacturing includes the simple task of reloading or modifying a firearm in any way. [Source]
Obama has also refereed the D.C. handgun ban as ‘constitutional’, he also leaked a gun ban list that would make millions of Americans potential criminals and placed anti-gun legislation in his stimulus bill.
In other news, a dire warning was sent to the Alex Jones show by an 11B Infantryman based in Fort Campbell, Kentucky shows that active duty military personnel are being secretly ordered to submit all information to their Chain of Command on all firearms they own privately, their location as well of details of any Concealed Carry permits. [Source]
In an e-mail with the attached document the soldier writes: “I live off post, with my firearms (which I don’t bring on post for any reason). A very frightening thing happened at work yesterday, I was ordered to fill out a list containing my firearm information. This included make, model, caliber, and serial number of all firearms I currently posses. In addition, I was also required to list registration information, location of all weapons individually, and information regarding any CCW permits I posses.”
The infantryman continues saying he had been in Fort Campbell for almost 8 years and never encountered anything like this before: “I don’t know how high this goes, but I am hearing that this is going on in other units at Fort Campbell as well. It just seems a little coincidental to me that within 90 days: the most anti-firearm President in history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest anti-firearm laws are put on the table in Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even if they are off post, and doesn’t provide any reason or purpose as to why. I fear something really nasty is blowing in the wind here.”
Indeed, we aren’t in Kansas anymore, Homeland Security and the U.S. Government are making it crystal clear its agenda to stifle all dissent against the U.S. Government, if you do not obey, you will be considered a potential terrorist extremist and you will no longer be “apart of the American family” as Rahm Emanuel put it. You will be denied of owning any firearms but even if you do have permission to own firearms you will have to follow many procedures in order to own guns or face harsh penalties.
http://www.infowars.com/there-is-one-typ..ng-back-1776/
LAPD Implies Owning Guns Is “Illegal”
http://www.prisonplanet.com/lapd-im..s-is-illegal.html
Filed under: 2-party system, 9/11 Truth, federal crime, Founding Fathers, George Bush, Globalism, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Impeach, left right paradigm, Nancy Pelosi, neocons, Neolibs, New World Order, Propaganda, US Constitution, War Crimes, War On Terror, We Are Change
Nancy Pelosi talks about the New World Order
Filed under: 2012 election, 9/11, 9/11 Truth, al-qaeda, Al-Qaeda Tapes, Anti-War, Bill Clinton, bin laden, Bin Laden Tapes, Bush Sr., Communism, Controlled Demolition, Coup, Dick Cheney, Dictatorship, Dissent, Empire, False Flag, Fascism, Founding Fathers, George Bush, George H.W. Bush, Goering, Gulf of Tonkin, howard stern, inside job, Iraq, Iraqnam, jeb bush, middle east, nation building, navy, navy seals, Nazi, neocons, occupation, Oil, PNAC, Protest, Saddam Hussein, Sanctions, Saudi Arabia, State Sponsored Terrorism, thomas jefferson, Vietnam, war on drugs, World Trade Center, wtc-7
Jesse Ventura Talks 9/11 Truth On Howard Stern
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07312008/ne..to_us_122366.htm
Man Charged With Placing 9/11 Stickers On A Plane
http://infowars.net/articles/july2008/300708Utah.htm
Filed under: 2008 Election, 2012 election, 9/11, 9/11 Truth, al franken, Dictatorship, Empire, False Flag, Fascism, foreign aid, Founding Fathers, Fox News, George Bush, Goering, Hitler, inside job, Iraq, jesse ventura, Media, nation building, Nazi, neocons, occupation, Saddam Hussein, Sean Hannity, WMD
Jesse Ventura Bodyslams Hannity.. (Again.)
Filed under: 4th amendment, 9/11, Abu Ghraib, airstrikes, al-qaeda, C-Span, CIA, Cindy Sheehan, Congress, Coup, DEBT, Dennis Kucinich, despotism, Detainee, Dick Cheney, Dictatorship, Economy, Empire, Extraordinary Rendition, fallen soldiers, False Flag, false information, Fascism, federal crime, FISA, Founding Fathers, George Bush, Guantanamo, House, House Subcommittee, Impeach, Iran, Iraq, iraq deaths, john ashcroft, John Bolton, judiciary committee, Karl Rove, Martial Law, Media, military strike, nation building, Nazi, neocons, Neolibs, occupation, Preemptive Strike, preemptive war, Propaganda, Protest, republic, Robert Wexler, Saddam Hussein, scooter libby, secret prisons, Shock and Awe, Tehran, Torture, Troops, US Constitution, US Economy, vincent bugliosi, War Crimes, war games, War On Terror, warrantless search, warrantless wiretap, WMD, WW3, ww4 | Tags: doug fife, fallujah, harriet myers, House Judiciary Committee, impeachment hearing, jonathan turley, judiciary hearing, kucinich, steve king, vincent bugliosi
Dam Breaks as Media Covers Bush Impeachment Hearing
Prisonplanet.com
July 25, 2008
The House Judiciary Committee hearing on the Bush Administration’s use of executive power has finally been covered by the corporate media:
LA Times: Is hearing to impeach Bush merely ‘anger management’?
FOX News: Rep. Kucinich Gets His Day to Air Impeachment Article
The Hill: Kucinich raises Bush impeachment at hearing
CBS: Big Crowd Gathers For House Judiciary Hearing On Bush “impeachment”
AP: Bush critics get an unimpeachable forum
Videos from the hearing:
Rep. Wexler recommends impeachment hearings
Rep. Steve King of Iowa argued there was no evidence that the Bush administration had committed any high crimes and misdeameanors.
Conyers: These Are Not Impeachment Hearings
George Washington’s Blog
July 23, 2008
John Conyers is now taking the position that no one at Friday’s impeachment hearing can accuse Bush or Cheney of any crime, or any impeachable offense, or dishonorable conduct, or even lying.
Moreover, Conyers is now saying that he will shut the hearing down if anyone does accuse the boys of crimes, impeachable offenses, or otherwise being naughty.
As David Swanson summarizes it:
“Apparently the rules of Congress are designed to allow impeachable offenses to be discussed only in impeachment hearings. Apparently this didn’t occur to Chairman Conyers when he decided to hold a non-impeachment impeachment hearing. As a result, his hearing may be quickly shut down, and he will have a choice of holding a real impeachment hearing, resigning, or dropping the pretense that he intends to resist Cheney and Bush in any way whatsoever.”
Please watch this must-see 10 minute video.
And read this.
Takes Phone Calls On Impeachment
http://www.cbsnews.com/storie../thecrypt/main4292489.shtml
Cindy Sheehan Kicked-Out of Judiciary Hearing
http://rawstory.com//news/20..eehan_exits_Judiciary_hearing_0725.html
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep John Conyers Plans Bush Impeachment Substitute
http://www.daily.pk/world/world..eachment-substitute.html
Fallujah Braces For Another Assault
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43248
Iraq Official: U.S. Troops May Leave By 2010
http://ap.google.com/articl..YeFwuWKCusr2jrojs98w8wD9228UM00
Turley fears Dems will let alleged ‘Bush crimes’ stay buried forever
http://rawstory.com//news/2008/.._pardons_prevent_0723.html
’Imperial presidency’ hearing to feature 13 witnesses
http://rawstory.com//news/2008..earing_to_feature_13_0724.html
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2008 Election, 4th amendment, amnesty, benjamin franklin, Big Brother, Bloggers, civil liberties, civil rights, colorado, Congress, corporations, corporatism, Dennis Kucinich, Denver, Economy, Fascism, federal crime, FISA, Founding Fathers, free speech, George Bush, GOP, HR 6166, Impeach, internet, Iraq, John McCain, magna carta, military commissions act, military commissions act of 2006, nation building, Nazi, neocons, NSA, occupation, Oppression, Patriot Act, Police State, secret service, Surveillance, US Constitution, US Economy, veterans, War On Terror, warrantless search, warrantless wiretap, We Are Change, White House | Tags: HR 6340, phil gramm
61-year-old woman kicked out of McCain “public” townhall meeting
PNA
July 7, 2008
On orders from Senator John McCain’s security detail, Denver police escorted a 61-year-old woman away who was waiting in line to attend a so-called town hall meeting with McCain that was billed as open to the public.
Carol Kreck, who works as a librarian in Denver, held a homemade sign reading “McCain = Bush.” On orders from McCain’s security detail, police cited her for trespassing and escorted her to the sidewalk. She was told if she returned she would be arrested.
“And all I did was carry a sign that said McCain = Bush,” Kreck said. “And for everyone who voted for Bush, I don’t see why it’s offensive to say McCain = Bush.”
This episode by McCain’s Secret Service appears to be a rerun of McCain’s 2005 town hall in Denver with President Bush in which the Secret Service had three Denver citizens removed from an “open” event where McCain was campaigning with Pres. Bush for his plan to privatize social security.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=W_2YRxW34-4
McCain Gets Testy With Vet Over GI Bill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzr3pdXqZ98
McCain Complains About Congress’s Vacation
http://www.theseminal.com/2..fter-he-has-missed-367-votes/
Filed under: 1984, amnesty, Big Brother, bill of rights, Britain, California, Camera Ban, Censorship, CFL, civil liberties, civil rights, Communism, Dictatorship, Empire, Europe, european union, Fascism, fascsim, Founding Fathers, george carlin, health and environment, humor, nanny state, New York, Oppression, police brutality, Police State, Racism, Raid, san fransisco, smoking ban, stasi, stasi tactics, Surveillance, United Kingdom, US Constitution, war on drugs | Tags: drew carey
Comedian Drew Carey on the Nanny State
Filed under: 2008 Election, 4th amendment, Afghanistan, bill of rights, CIA, Dennis Kucinich, Founding Fathers, Iraq, nation building, occupation, scandal, Surveillance, US Constitution, Valerie Plame, War Crimes
Kucinich presents Bush impeachment petition
Sign it! here
Filed under: 1st amendment, amnesty, Dick Cheney, Dissent, Founding Fathers, free speech, George Bush, heckled, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, neocons, Protest, Uncategorized, US Constitution, virginia | Tags: thomas jefferson
Protesters Call Bush a Fascist During July 4th Event at the Home of Thomas Jefferson
Protesters made it hard to hear President Bush Friday as he welcomed new citizens and marked Independence Day at the home of Thomas Jefferson.
As is the tradition each Fourth of July, a naturalization ceremony was held at Monticello in Charlottesville, Va. This year, 76 immigrants from 30 different countries came to take the oath of citizenship.
But Bush repeatedly was interrupted as he welcomed the guests.
“That man is a fascist!” one protester yelled. Another swore at him.
The protesters later were removed from the ceremony by law enforcement officials.
“To my fellow citizens to be — we believe in free speech in the United States of America,” Bush said when the protesters started shouting.
To the din of more yelling, Bush discussed Jefferson’s legacy as he introduced the citizens.
“We honor Jefferson’s legacy by aiding the rise of liberty in lands that do not know the blessings of freedom, and on this Fourth of July we pay tribute to the brave men and women who wear the uniform of the United States of America,” he said.
“We also honor Jefferson’s legacy by welcoming newcomers to our land, and that is what we’re here to celebrate today.”
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/re..rticleid=1104453&srvc=rss
Filed under: 2nd Amendment, anti gun, Child Abuse, Founding Fathers, George Bush, Gun Control, mississippi, rape, supreme court, US Constitution, Washington D.C.
Supreme Court: 2nd Amendment Stays in the Constitution
Jacob Dawson
One News Now
June 26, 2008
After the Supreme Court decided yesterday that child rapist have more rights than the children they rape. Today, they actually got one right, however, the court did leave some wiggle room for further challenges to the 2nd Amendment. The key sentence that kills the 2nd Amendment is:
“Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.”
So they are saying that you can only have weapons that are considered “normal”, but my question is who defines what is normal? And “normal” guns in Mississippi are not what are “normal” in New York. So I’ll take this as a temporary win, but James Madison is rolling over in his grave on this one.
Residents in the District of Columbia can own handguns.
AP
June 26, 2008
Residents in the District of Columbia can own handguns. The Supreme Court ruled today that Americans have an individual right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, ending the District’s 32-year-old ban on handguns.
The court’s 5-4 decision is the first major ruling on gun rights in U.S. history. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most gun control laws intact.
Justice Antonin Scalia writes in the majority opinion that the Constitution does not permit “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.”
He does say the ruling would not affect laws that ban felons and the mentally ill from owning guns or prohibit people from carrying guns in sensitive places like schools and government buildings.
Reactions of the Supreme Court ruling
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/06/reaction-suprem.html
Filed under: 2008 Election, 9/11, 9/11 Truth, Abu Ghraib, Alex Jones, Barack Obama, bilderberg, bin laden, bob barr, central bank, civil liberties, civil rights, Credit Crisis, DEBT, Detainees, Economic Collapse, economic depression, Economy, enemy combatant, Extraordinary Rendition, Federal Reserve, Founding Fathers, gas prices, glenn beck, Great Depression, Greenback, Guantanamo, Habeas Corpus, Inflation, Iraq, Joe Scarborough, John McCain, morning joe, MSNBC, Oil, Petrol, rendition, RNC, Ron Paul, Stock Market, Torture, US Constitution, US Economy, War On Terror, Willie Geist
Ron Paul: “Osama bin Laden loves what we have done”
Filed under: 5th Amendment, Cuba, Detainee, enemy combatant, Founding Fathers, George Bush, Guantanamo, Habeas Corpus, HR 6166, John McCain, magna carta, military commissions act, neocons, supreme court, Torture, US Constitution
Supreme Court Restores Habeas Corpus
Glenn Greenwald
Salon
June 13, 2008
In a major rebuke to the Bush administration’s theories of presidential power — and in an equally stinging rebuke to the bipartisan political class which has supported the Bush detention policies — the U.S. Supreme Court today, in a 5-4 decision (.pdf), declared Section 7 of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 unconstitutional. The Court struck down that section of the MCA because it purported to abolish the writ of habeas corpus — the means by which a detainee challenges his detention in a court — despite the fact that the Constitution permits suspension of that writ only “in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion.”
As a result, Guantanamo detainees accused of being “enemy combatants” have the right to challenge the validity of their detention in a full-fledged U.S. federal court proceeding. The ruling today is the first time in U.S. history that the Court has ruled that detainees held by the U.S. Government in a place where the U.S. does not exercise formal sovereignty (Cuba technically is sovereign over Guantanamo) are nonetheless entitled to the Constitutional guarantee of habeas corpus whenever they are held in a place where the U.S. exercises effective control.
In upholding the right of habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees, the Court found that the “Combatant Status Review Tribunals” process (“CSRT”) offered to Guantanamo detainees — mandated by the John-McCain-sponsored Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 — does not constitute a constitutionally adequate substitute for habeas corpus. To the contrary, the Court found that such procedures — which have long been criticized as sham hearings due to the fact that defendants cannot have a lawyer present, government evidence is presumptively valid, and defendants are prevented from challenging (and sometimes even knowing about) much of the evidence against them — “fall well short of the procedures and adversarial mechanisms that would eliminate the need for habeas corpus review.” Those grave deficiencies in the CSRT process mean that “there is considerable risk of error” in the tribunals’ conclusions.
The Court’s ruling was grounded in its recognition that the guarantee of habeas corpus was so central to the Founding that it was one of the few individual rights included in the Constitution even before the Bill of Rights was enacted. As the Court put it: “the Framers viewed freedom from unlawful restraint as a fundamental precept of liberty, and they understood the writ of habeas corpus as a vital instrument to secure that freedom.” The Court noted that freedom from arbitrary or baseless imprisonment was one of the core rights established by the 13th Century Magna Carta, and it is the writ of habeas corpus which is the means for enforcing that right. Once habeas corpus is abolished — as the Military Commissions Act sought to do — then we return to the pre-Magna Carta days where the Government is free to imprison people with no recourse.
Filed under: 1st amendment, Alex Jones, DHS, FBI, FEMA, Founding Fathers, free speech, Homeland Security, Patriot Act, US Constitution, War On Terror
Feds Accuse Student Of “Terror and Espionage” For Talking About Constitution
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
May 12, 2008
A student of a large bible college in east Texas was accused by federal agents of committing an “act of terror and espionage” after he gave a talk to a group of Boy Scouts in which he encouraged them to educate themselves about the U.S. constitution.
Jeff, who wishes to remain anonymous at present, is a student of the college and an interim pastor of a small church in Mount Vernon, Texas. He appeared today as a guest on the Alex Jones Show to relate what took place.
As part of his duties as an advisor in the college office, Jeff was tasked with the role of giving a short speech and a tour to a group of Boy Scouts that were visiting the college, with a focus on how patriotism and liberty are emphasized in the teaching style of the university.
Jeff said he told the boys, “It’s going to be you who is going to take this country and either make or break it – you need to get back to your constitution, you need to get to know your bill of rights and you need to stand up for them.”
Jeff also mentioned that the freedoms enumerated in the bill of rights were fast being usurped by the government and he briefly talked about the USA Patriot Act.
“I said they’re stripping us of what we know to be America, what you need to do is re-orient yourself to the constitution because that is the very founding basis of our government and it is the supreme law of the land,” he added.
The next day Jeff was called into the main administrative office of the university where he was met by college officials and two men wearing dark suits and sunglasses who did not identify themselves. A state trooper was also guarding the door to make sure everyone stayed inside the office.
Jeff was asked by the men if he talked to the Boy Scouts about the constitution the previous day. Jeff was then shown a transcript of what he said and asked to fill in the blanks.
“I saw the transcript of what I said and every word that those boys had said,” stated Jeff.
Jeff speculated that the recording of his talk with the Boy Scouts may have been made by a scout master who looked like a Marine that was taking the tour with Jeff.
After asking the men where they were from, Jeff was told he was committing “acts of terror and espionage” by talking to the Boy Scouts about the constitution and the bill of rights.
Jeff was unable to ascertain exactly where the feds were from but university officials later indicated that DHS (Department of Homeland Security) and the FBI were involved.
Jeff said that the two men told him, “If you say anything, do anything, continue to talk about these kind of things, we can have your head on a silver platter and the University’s head on a silver platter and all the programs they’ve got going on.”
Jeff said that a high level college official who was present during the meeting, himself an ex-Marine Vietnam veteran, was extremely nervous and “shaking” as Jeff was being lectured by the two men.
“I went to my room and I broke down in tears,” said Jeff after the meeting was finished, “That’s it – our country’s gone,” he added.
Read Full Article Here
Feds Accuse Student Of “Terror and Espionage” For Talking About Constitution
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, Big Brother, brainwashing, Conditioning, DHS, Dissent, domestic terror, Founding Fathers, free speech, glenn beck, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, HR 1955, Media, Media Fear, orwell, Patriot Act, Police State, Propaganda, Protest, Ron Paul, rosie o' donnell, s. 1959, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought criminal, US Constitution, War On Terror
While You Slept Your Congress Took Away Your Constitution
http://www.politicallore.com/unca..dered-a-possible-terrorist/63
Civil Libertarians Warn of ’Patriot Act Lite’
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18779.htm
Filed under: Britain, Canada, Congress, Europe, european union, Founding Fathers, global economy, global government, global market, global police force, Globalism, h.r. 390, Mexico, New World Order, ngo, North American Union, SPP, United Kingdom, world police force, WW2 | Tags: transatlantic policy network
Planning Underway for an EU-USA Common Market
Bill Hahn
JBS
February 13, 2008
The Transatlantic Policy Network seeks EU-style integration for the European Union and the USA by 2015.
Follow this link to the original source: “Creating a Transatlantic Common Market”
Even with all of the recent attention given to the North American Union (NAU) and its deep integration of trade markets in Canada, Mexico and the USA, it seems another effort at trade integration is underway. This time the plan is for greater integration of the European Union and the United States, and much like the Security and Prosperity Partnership of the NAU, the Transatlantic Union (TAU) is being quietly created.
According to an exclusive at TheNewAmerican.com, a little known NGO (non governmental organization) called the Transatlantic Policy Network, has been working behind the scenes to advance plans to merge the United States with Europe. The article states, “Working carefully, if quietly, since the early 1990s, the organization has moved quickly to gain the agreement of leaders on both sides of the ocean that further integration is necessary and desirable. Now, the organization is much closer to achieving its goals than anyone would suspect.”
paper published early last year by the organization entitled, “Completing the Transatlantic Market,” states: “It is time for a complementary, top down approach to transatlantic cooperation through a joint commitment by the European Union and the United States to a roadmap for achieving a Transatlantic Market by 2015 and creation of an overarching framework for dialogue and action to achieve that goal.”
The big difference between the NAU and the TAU is that Congress has already passed legislation embracing the TAU concept. H. Res. 390 was passed in late 2003 and states that the “United States and the European community are aware of their shared responsibility, not only to further transatlantic security, but to address other common interests such as environmental protection, poverty reduction, combating international crime and promoting human rights, and to work together to meet those transnational challenges which affect the well-being of all.” To do this, TheNewAmerican.com points out that laws and regulations would need to be harmonized before any integration could begin.
While Americans were alarmed at this step in the NAU, especially considering how Mexico would need to be brought up to the US and Canada’s standards, we need to be similarly alarmed at the effort to meld the US into a transatlantic common market. Remember that the EU started as a common market that has now morphed into EU citizens not being able to vote on a new constitution, not having local representation (Parliament is forced to regularly travel to Brussels to approve or disapprove a mountain of legislation that they have not seen before) and not having individual national sovereignty for each of the 27 member countries. Rather, all countries are lumped together under a centralized EU bureaucracy.
The political union of Europe did not appear over night, but it did evovle from a European common market. Likewise, the U.S. would not likely undergo a political merger with Europe in the short term. But the natural progression, as demonstrated by the experience of Europe since World War II, is for economic union of the type required for a common market to lead, inexorably, to political union at some point in the future. This is just the sort of entangling alliance the Founding Fathers warned us about. They intended the USA to be independent of Europe. Present day Americans would do well to heed their wisdom.
Filed under: anarchy, bill of rights, Britain, Communism, declaration of independence, democracy, Dictatorship, Economy, Fascism, Founding Fathers, monarchy, oligarchy, Police State, republic, Ron Paul, US Constitution, US Economy
JBS: Overview of America
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6732659166933078950&hl=en
Filed under: 2008 Election, boston, Boston Tea Party, California, CNN, FEC, Founding Fathers, Fred Thompson, GOP, Hillary Clinton, Iowa, John Kerry, John McCain, LA, michigan, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, moneybomb, New Hampshire, republican primaries, Ron Paul, ron paul blimp, ron paul meetups, Rudy Giuliani, Texas, tim russert
Ron Paul Sets All-Time Fundraising Record
Nolan Chart
December 17, 2007
This screenshot was taken 3 minutes after the fundraiser ended
Unofficially, the Ron Paul campaign raised $5.92 million dollars on-line yesterday. That’s the largest amount every raised by any candidate on-line in any electoral campaign ever, anywhere. Over 57,668 Paul supporters can be justly proud of themselves and delighted about what those kind of funds can bring to their campaign.
The Boston Tea Party blitz “broke the thermometer” on the $12 million campaign quarterly goal within the first few hours. Reporters and columnists will probably be quibbling about what records it actually broke for the next week, while they’re taking rides on the Ron Paul Blimp. Volunteer promoter Trevor Lyman will probably be getting more than his 15 minutes of fame.
Campaign Records
Candidates are not required to record contribution receipts on the day they are received. They are only required to exercise “due diligence” in entering the data prior to the end of the quarter, for reporting to the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Campaign offices may have stacks of checks received during the course of a week, before allocating staff to do the required data entry before a reporting deadline.
As a result, there is no way to tell, from FEC reports, what day the contributions were sent or received. The only thing known is when they were entered into the computerized reporting systems. The last day of a quarterly reporting period may be the most hectic. That’s when Hillary Clinton’s campaign entered $6.2 million dollars of contributions: June 30, 2007. At the time, her campaign publicized several million-dollar fundraising events in the prior week, but took no credit for any one-day record for receipts.
Ron Paul beat that record too! In addition to the on-line contributions, he received over $400,000+ in off-line contributions on Sunday, bringing his verified record one-day fundraising total of $6.32 million.
On-Line Receipts
In the 2004 presidential campaign, John Kerry took in $2.7 million from on-line contributions (automatically recorded into their systems on that day) two days after he “locked up” the nomination: March 6, 2004. That record was broken by the November 5th Ron Paul Money Bomb that brought in $4.2 million.
However, FEC records indicate that the Kerry campaign entered an additional $3.0 million on the same day. There is no way to tell when those additional funds were sent or received. Nevertheless, the total of $5.7 million has been reported as a one-day fundraising record for Kerry. Ron Paul total receipts broke that dubious record by more than a half-million dollars.
Quarterly Records
The 4th Quarter FEC reports are not due until ten days after January 1st, 2008. Given Ron Paul’s totals, it is unlikely that any competitors will be bragging about their quarterly totals before the numbers are released by the FEC, well after the Iowa and Wyoming caucuses and the New Hampshire and Michigan primaries.
At this point, the Ron Paul effort is projected to raise over $21 million for the fourth quarter. That exceeds the third quarter totals reported by every other Republican candidate for President. None of them have reported their receipts so far this quarter, although Mike Huckabee was delighted with breaking a $2.0 million campaign goal last week. At the beginning of this quarter, Ron Paul had more cash on hand ($5m+) than any other Republican candidate except Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson. Both Romney and McCain were in the red, due to debts incurred by their campaigns (for Romney, three loans from his own pocket).
For too many months, reporters have discounted Ron Paul’s credibility. He either couldn’t raise enough money (“the mother’s milk of politics”) or he couldn’t develop enough grass-roots support to turn out voters. On the first count, Paul is now the apparent leader in Republican Presidential candidate fundraising. He will undoubtedly be hiring more staff and buying more advertising. But, for real grass-roots activists, none of the campaigns even come close to the 77,949 real people who are participating in MeetUp events around the country. That’s twice as many committed supporters as all of the other campaigns (Republican and Democrat) combined. There are a dozen other social internet groups with tens of thousands of Paul supporters. In terms of grass-roots activism, nobody even comes close to the Ron Paul rEVOLution squads.
Next Sunday, Tim Russert will not be able to say “You can’t win” to Ron Paul’s face. That hour-long appearance on Meet The Press will expose millions more to the Ron Paul message. What astounds the other campaigns is that Ron has no “handlers” to “prep him” for this major appearance. He doesn’t need them. He’s been practicing for 30 years and never varied in his principles. He is naturally eloquent and he can be totally honest, because he respects voters and knows the facts. There will be a lot of people astounded by the successes of the Ron Paul campaign. And they will be astounded again when the January election results start arriving.
Ron Paul Tea Party Los Angeles,Ca
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGB8BeUWtwA
International Ron Paul Support at Strasbourg Teaparty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19BuFDG18lo
Austin Tea Party
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHbYr011UoI
Dec 16th Ron Paul donation day coverage on CNN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KCrvxZAsO8
Related News:
Ron Paul Surpasses Fund Raising Record Held by John Kerry
http://www.huntingtonnews.net/local/071217-rutherford-localronpaul.html
How Ron Paul Has Already Won
http://www.nolanchart.com/article561.html
Ron Paul: CNN Early Tea Party Coverage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn8t86aN_hk
Ron Paul’s $6.3 million tea party
http://www.homelandstupid…n-pauls-63-million-tea-party/
Paul raises $6 million in 24-hour effort
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20…v5WoVxyVfJWGpp24cA
Ron Paul Money Bomb Raises Over Half a Million in First Hour
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1292
Ron Paul Set To Smash Fundraising Record
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/121607_ron_paul.htm
Paul: Americans embrace reform
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=35252§i..3510203
Would Ron Paul Be Endorsed by the Founding Fathers? Lawyer Says Yes
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/161207Fathers.htm
Poor College Students Sacrificing Precious Christmas cash for Ron Paul
http://jeffreyharmon.net/2007…hristmas-cash-for-ron-paul/
Congressman Ron Paul Introduces the Property Tax Deduction for All Act
http://pressmediawire.com/article.cfm?articleID=4273
IRS defense attorney to speak at Ron Paul rally in Las Vegas
http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=200846
Attacks Don’t Work, Now They Mimic Us
http://www.nolanchart.com/article542.html
Ron Paul ‘Listen to what he has to say’
Austin is a stronghold for Ron Paul campaign
Ron Paul promises to rescue the republic, and drink tea…
It May Very Well Be Ron Paul’s Time
The man behind Paul’s fundraising curtain
Ron Paul Excluded from Bill O’Reilly Poll
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2-party system, 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Big Brother, DHS, Dissent, domestic terror, Founding Fathers, free speech, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, HR 1955, left right paradigm, martin luther king, Neolibs, orwell, Police State, Protest, s. 1959, Senate, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought criminal, US Constitution, War On Terror
Obama Supports Thought Crime Prevention Bill
Jessica Lee
Indypendent
December 11, 2007
Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama says that he will support the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act (S. 1959). According to the automatic email responses constituents are receiving from his office, Obama appears to be straddling the fence between preserving civil liberties and being tough on terrorism.
“The American people understand that new threats require flexible responses to keep them safe. They also insist that our responses to threats respect the constitution and do not violate the basic tenets of our democracy,” Obama’s email said. Several people who have written to Obama have posted his response on various blogs, including “Justin” who’s personal blog was picked up on diggs.com.
“I wrote Senator Obama (my senator from Illinois) about this act, which is now in a committee of his (the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs). I asked that he read the bill (not to insult his intelligence, but after the Patriot Act it appears this is a necessary request for most senators), and that he recognize the dire consequences that could result from its vague language,” Justin wrote Dec. 6 below the post of Obama’s email. “He’s quite eloquent, you’ve got to give him that. This act ‘includes provisions prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts from violating civil rights and civil liberties of U.S. citizens.’ Didn’t we used to have something like that? What was it called? Oh right… The Constitution.”
The House version of the bill, H.R. 1955, passed Oct. 23 by a vote of 404-6 under the “suspension of the rules,” a provision that is available to quickly pass bills considered “non-controversial.”
Obama is on the 17-member Senate Committee for Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, where S. 1959 was introduced by Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) Aug. 2. “I will keep your important comments in mind as I work with my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. I will work to ensure that this legislation helps to achieve our domestic security objectives while protecting civil liberties and constitutional rights,” Obama stated in his email to Justin.
Many scholars, historians and civil liberties experts say they fear that the proposed bill will set the stage for future criminal legislation that be used against U.S.-based groups engaged in legal but unpopular political activism, ranging from political Islamists to animal-rights and environmental campaigners to radical right-wing organizations.
“This bill fits the pattern we are seeing coming out of Congress – both Republican and Democratic – of a continued campaign of fear, which gets into heads of Americans that we now need to start criminalizing ideology,” said Alejandro Queral, executive director of the Northwest Constitutional Rights Center. He said he is very concerned about the bill’s vague definitions of “violent radicalization,” “homegrown terrorism,” and the terms within the definitions including “extremist belief system,” “violence” and “force.”
“What is an extremist belief system? Who defines this?” Queral questioned. “Planes flying into the World Trade Center is an extremist belief, but are anti-abortion activists extremists? Are individuals who liberate mink extremists? These are broad definitions that encompass so much, which need to rather be very narrowly tailored. It is criminalizing thought and ideology, rather than criminal activity.”
Jules Boykoff, an assistant professor of politics and government at Pacific University and author of Beyond Bullets: The Suppression of Dissent in the United States, told The Indypendent said he is concerned about how the government is broadening the definition of terrorism.
“Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act is a law that created a new brand of terrorists, the ‘domestic terrorist.’ Under this definition, the civil rights work Martin Luther King, Jr. did could have been construed as an act of ‘domestic terrorism,” Boykoff said.
In a Nov. 30 Common Dreams article, ‘Homegrown’ Suppression of Dissent,’ Boykoff provided a historical-based critique of who could be included under the umbrella definition of terrorism. “Even a cursory look backward through U.S. history reveals heroic figures who could be dubbed ‘violent radicals’ or ‘homegrown terrorists’ under the proposed bill, from U.S. revolutionaries like Sam Adams to gun-toting slavery abolitionists like John Brown to militant civil-rights organizers like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr.”
House Hearing Presentation Links 9/11 Truth Sites to Terrorism
http://noworldsystem.com/200…1-truth-sites-to-terrorism/
S. 1959 Eviscerates Free Speech
http://rense.com/general79/rduh.htm
Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America
http://www.newstarget.com/022308.html
Truthout: The Violent Radicalization Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112907J.shtml
Law Teachers Oppose HR 1955
http://nlg.org/news/index.php?entry=entry071127-093332
Huffington Post: The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act
http://www.huffin….adicalizatio_b_74091.html?view=screen
Senate Could Vote On Thought Crimes Bill Soon
http://www.jbs.org/node/6474
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th amendment, Anti-War, Big Brother, Bloggers, DHS, Dissent, domestic terror, fda, Founding Fathers, free speech, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, HR 1955, OKC bombing, orwell, Police State, Protest, Ruby Ridge, s. 1959, Senate, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought criminal, timothy mcveigh, US Constitution, Waco, War On Terror
ACTION ALERT:
Call Your Senators and Tell Them to Refuse H.R. 1955 (S.1959)
http://hsgac.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=About.Membership
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Senate Could Vote On Thought Crimes Bill Soon
JBS
November 30, 2007
When the full Senate returns to Washington in early December, they will soon begin to schedule floor votes on several pieces of legislation. One such piece of legislation is the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.
With two versions of this bill currently in the Senate (H.R. 1955 and S. 1959), the legislation could attack First Amendment rights by mandating the government to clamp down on free speech online, among other things.
It should be remembered that following the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Clinton administration blamed not just the indicted perpetrators, Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier, but also all those who had like McVeigh, Nichols and Fortier protested against the government’s deadly actions at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Time magazine and other media organs joined the administration in charging that these “anti-government” protesters were actually “ideational co-conspirators” with the OKC bombers.
Like President Clinton, President Bush now equates opposition to his policies, especially concerning the War in Iraq and the “War on Terror,” as unpatriotic, or even treasonable. We are perilously close to losing our precious right to freedom of expression.
Would Americans be liable for arrest and prosecution under the “Violent Radicalization,” “Homegrown Terrorism,” or “Ideologically based violence,” provisions of H.R. 1955 and S. 1959, for example, for stating that citizens must be armed to protect themselves against government-imposed tyranny? Perhaps not just yet, but it is not at all farfetched to suggest that such a state of affairs could quickly develop, especially considering the virulent anti-gun bias of the elites in the media and government.
Having recently freed themselves by force of arms from the tyranny of King George and understanding full well the importance of an armed citizenry for the preservation of liberty, our Founding Fathers were adamant that Americans have the means and the determination to oppose any similar tyranny that might develop under the proposed new national government.
Thomas Jefferson was inflexible on the issue, asserting: “No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist (No.28): “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government …. ”
Noah Webster expressed the same principle this way: “The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.”
Patrick Henry declared: “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined …. The great object is that every man be armed.”
George Washington averred that firearms are “the people’s liberty teeth.”
However, under H.R. 1955 and S. 1959, each of these Founding Fathers might be prosecuted for “planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual … to intimidate or coerce the United States government.”
To take immediate action on the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, click here [1].
To donate to The John Birch Society’s legislative alert system, click here [1].
Thank you,
The John Birch Society
Standing for family and freedom since 1958
Law Teachers Oppose HR 1955
http://nlg.org/news/index.php?entry=entry071127-093332
Huffington Post: The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act
http://www.huffin….adicalizatio_b_74091.html?view=screen
Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America
http://www.newstarget.com/022308.html
Truthout: The Violent Radicalization Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112907J.shtml
S. 1959 Eviscerates Free Speech
http://rense.com/general79/rduh.htm
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682
Filed under: 4th amendment, Airport Security, anti-terror database, Big Brother, Blackwater, Burma, catastrophic event, Charles Goyette, CIA, Continuity of Government, Coup, Dictatorship, enemy combatants, fake terror threat, False Flag, Fascism, Founding Fathers, Geneva Convention, George Bush, Guantanamo, Habeas Corpus, Hitler, Holocaust, Homeland Security, Martial Law, Naomi Wolf, Nazi, neocons, Oppression, Police State, Problem Reaction Solution, Ron Paul, stalin, State Sponsored Terrorism, Surveillance, Torture, US Constitution, War On Terror, White House, WW2
Lecture by Naomi Wolf – ‘The End of America’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc
Charles Goyette Interviews Naomi Wolf
http://mparent7777-2.blogspot.com/20…rviews-naomi-wolf.html
Filed under: Alan Greenspan, Big Banks, Central Banks, Dictatorship, Economic Collapse, economic depression, Economy, Empire, Federal Reserve, Founding Fathers, global elite, gold, Great Depression, Inflation, internationalists, JP Morgan, rockefeller, Ron Paul, rothschilds, US Constitution, US Economy, US Treasury, US Treasury department
FIAT EMPIRE – Why the Federal Reserve Violates the U.S. Constitution
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329002339531&hl=en
Filed under: Congress, Dictatorship, Founding Fathers, George Bush, H. J. Res. 53, Iraq, Military, Ron Paul, Troops, US Constitution, War Crimes, White House
Congress Must Re-Assume War Powers, Lawmakers Say
CNSNews.com
October 29, 2007
(CNSNews.com) – Who has the primary authority to wage war on the behalf of the United States: the commander-in-chief or the Congress? It’s a question that’s been raised several times in history, and one that Congress thought was settled by the adoption of the Vietnam-era War Powers Act of 1973.
Now sponsors of a resolution to amend that law hope to settle that question permanently and make it clear that the president must always seek the consent of Congress before getting the nation involved in armed conflict or war.
At a press conference Thursday on Capitol Hill, Reps. Walter B. Jones (R-N.C.), William Delahunt (D-Mass.), Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Wayne Gilchrest (R-Md.) announced the introduction of H. J. Res. 53, the Constitutional War Powers Resolution.
“This bill will inject Congress into the process, so that it can meet its constitutional responsibility,” Jones said. “We will require more reporting from the White House, and we will require more consultation with the White House. This is a bill I think will have a lot of support in Congress.”
Jones, a conservative from North Carolina whose district includes the Marine Corps installation Camp Lejeune, is an ardent critic of the war in Iraq, but he said the legislation isn’t about Iraq.
“This is about future wars, not Iraq,” Jones told Cybercast News Service. “But the failed policy in Iraq has helped me understand that in behalf of the American people, in behalf of those children today that might one day be sent to war, that Congress must meet its constitutional responsibility, and this bill will help the Congress meet its responsibility.”
Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, the president must consult Congress within 60 days of engaging the U.S. in armed hostilities. If members do not authorize his action, he is required, by law, to remove U.S. forces from action.
The new Jones-Delahunt resolution would specifically prohibit the president from entering into future hostilities without congressional action except to specifically “repel and retaliate for an attack on the United States, repel an attack on U.S. troops, or protect and evacuate U.S. citizens.”
It would also give members of Congress legal standing in any court action on the issue.
Delahunt will shepherd the measure through the Democratic Congress.
“The War Powers Resolution has never worked,” he said. “According to the Congressional Research Service, there have been 120 executive branch filings ‘consistent with’ the War Powers Resolution, but only one that started the 60-day clock ‘pursuant to’ it.
“As a result, this is too dangerous a period of history for us to be floating around with no rules, no regular process, and no consensus on the authority for such a decision,” Delahunt added.
Paul, a declared presidential candidate, said he is co-sponsoring the measure, though the Constitution itself is specific enough.
“My first choice has always been to repeal the War Powers Resolution and follow the declaration of war provision in the Constitution,” Paul told Cybercast News Service. “But in the meantime, I think this new resolution is an improvement over what we have.”
What did the framers intend?
The power to declare war is laid out in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, otherwise known as the War Powers Clause.
Specifically, it says Congress has the power “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.”
Ronald Rotunda, a professor of law at George Mason University, said the debate over war powers will eventually have to be decided by the Supreme Court – it’s a major constitutional issue that has never really been settled.
Even the 1973 War Powers Resolution, part of which was declared unconstitutional, was never fully reviewed by the court, he added.
“A congressional resolution is not going to be the end of the matter,” Rotunda said. “The courts will have to decide it.”
Historically, though, the courts have regarded the dispute over war powers as a turf war between Congress and the president. But now the question is being posed in the high-speed age of global terrorism.
“We know that the Framers of the Constitution initially had language that said, only Congress can ‘make war,’ and changed it to only Congress can ‘declare war’ – they changed it because they realized that there were wars we would be in that were not officially declared,” Rotunda said.
“In fact, the bloodiest war in American history, the Civil War, was never declared. The last time the United States was in a declared war was World War II, and we’ve had lots of wars since then,” Rotunda added.
However, Thomas Woods, senior fellow in American history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and author of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History,” said the historical documents are clear: the Framers intended the war powers to belong only to the legislative branch – unless the U.S. was attacked by surprise and there was no time to assemble Congress.
Early on in American history, Woods said, the Supreme Court held that even in lesser conflicts, such as the “near-war” that the United States fought with France in the 1790s, Congress needed to authorize presidential military action.
In one famous case during that time, he said, a ship commander actually got into trouble for following President Jefferson’s order allowing privateers to seize any ship going to — or coming from — France.
“Congress had directed the president simply to seize any ships coming from France, not ships going to France,” Woods said.
“Well, this ship commander seized a ship that was going to France. He listened to the president rather than the Congress. What did the Supreme Court say?” he added.
“The court said the Congress has the power to lay out these statutes and this ship commander could not claim that he was exonerated because he was following the president. A presidential order, even in war time, does not trump a congressional statute,” Woods said.
Louis Fisher, a researcher at the Library of Congress and author of the book, “Presidential War Power,” sides with Woods. He said there’s no historical justification for the idea that a president can unilaterally act to send troops.
“The first president who ever did that, and got us into a big war without coming to Congress, was Harry Truman,” Fisher said. “He went to the U.N. Security Council over Korea as a substitute for Congress, and it has caused problems ever since.”
The War Powers issue isn’t likely to be resolved soon, though the University of Virginia’s Miller Center of Public Policy has pledged to try. In February, it convened a blue-ribbon national commission, chaired by former Indiana Congressman Lee Hamilton to examine the question.
The commissioners, which include former Attorney General Ed Meese and historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, hope to issue a report within months.
Filed under: 2008 Election, California, Economic Collapse, economic depression, Economy, Federal Reserve, Founding Fathers, gold, GOP, Great Depression, Greenback, Income Tax, Inflation, Iraq, IRS, jim rogers, middle class, New Hampshire, private banks, republican primaries, Ron Paul, tonight show, US Economy
Ron Paul Gaining Ground In New Hampshire
New poll proves mainstream dismissal of congressman’s presidential campaign is foolhardy
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
October 29, 2007
A newly released presidential primary preference poll indicates that Ron Paul is gaining significant ground in New Hampshire and dispels the mainstream media myth that the Congressman is not amongst the top tier candidates.
The poll, conducted by St. Anselm College’s Institute of Politics, puts Ron Paul 4th behind Giuliani, McCain and Romney with 7.4 percent. It places Fred Thompson, touted as second favourite to take the GOP nomination, in 6th place.
The poll also shows that 40 percent describe themselves as “independents” who may vote Republican, and 19 percent who will, are still undecided. Ron Paul’s campaign staff are encouraged by these figures as they show that none of the other big name candidates have grasped the imagination of voters, leaving the door very much open for the Congressman.
Paul’s campaign office is about to embark on a major media blitz in New Hampshire, readying phone banks to call potential Ron Paul supporters throughout the state and major TV ads, such as the one below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay4vXZWxeuU
Congressman Paul, who filed his declaration of candidacy to run in the New Hampshire presidential primary at the State house in Concord last week, is also scheduled to make an appearance on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno tomorrow night.
Recent poll results from public opinion service Rasmussen Reports also indicate that support for Ron Paul could be much higher nationwide, placing him above Giuliani in some instances.
“By all accounts, Dr. Paul’s support is rising steadily,” said Paul campaign chairman Kent Snyder. “Americans are ready for a change and his unifying message of freedom, peace and prosperity is bringing more people together every day.”
Ron Paul Interview on Economics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz689NHcAKo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_B2STQuUXA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52_SOeDVIQk
Jim Rogers Endorses Ron Paul
http://dailypaul.com/node/4817
Is San Francisco Ron Paul territory?
http://www.latimes.com/new…?coll=la-home-center
noworldsystem.com 