NationStates Jolt Archive

Two overlooked stories of Fascist Policy here at home:

1) Oregon anti-terrorism law targets protesters

http://www.prisonplanet.com/oregon_law_would_jail_protesters_as_terrorists.html

Apr 2, 8:57 pm ET

By Lee Douglas
PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war demonstrations, critics say.

The bill has met strong opposition but lawmakers still expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state senate judiciary committee, whose Chairman, Republican Senator John Minnis, wrote the proposed legislation.

Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

2) Welcome back to the age of book banning
http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexclusive/exclusive1.htm

April 4, 2003 -- 1:05 am PST
NewsWithViews.com

LAS VEGAS, NV -- Irwin Schiff is a well known author with over 500,000 books in print about the economy and the income tax. He is also now amongst the few who have had a book banned by the U.S. Government. On March 19, 2003, Federal Judge Lloyd George ordered Schiff to stop selling his book "The Federal Mafia" which has been in print for over 13 years. According to Schiff the Federal Government is using the American people's preoccupation with the war in Iraq as an opportunity to squelch freedom here at home.


Books being banned? Protesters defined as terrrorist? What's next, Concentration Camps!?

They already had concentration camps. Look into the 1940's and what they did to Japanese Americans on the west coast.

Technically, the Concentration Camp already exists...

Camp X-Ray anyone?

Two overlooked stories of Fascist Policy here at home:

1) Welcome back to the age of book banning
http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexclusive/exclusive1.htm

April 4, 2003 -- 1:05 am PST
NewsWithViews.com

LAS VEGAS, NV -- Irwin Schiff is a well known author with over 500,000 books in print about the economy and the income tax. He is also now amongst the few who have had a book banned by the U.S. Government. On March 19, 2003, Federal Judge Lloyd George ordered Schiff to stop selling his book "The Federal Mafia" which has been in print for over 13 years. According to Schiff the Federal Government is using the American people's preoccupation with the war in Iraq as an opportunity to squelch freedom here at home.




2) Oregon anti-terrorism law targets protesters

http://www.prisonplanet.com/oregon_law_would_jail_protesters_as_terrorists.html

Apr 2, 8:57 pm ET

By Lee Douglas
PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war demonstrations, critics say.

The bill has met strong opposition but lawmakers still expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state senate judiciary committee, whose Chairman, Republican Senator John Minnis, wrote the proposed legislation.

Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

Books being banned? Protesters defined as terrrorist? What's next, Concentration Camps!?sounds like a neocon dreamworld

Technically, the Concentration Camp already exists...

Camp X-Ray anyone?


What do you think all of the FEMA buildings are for?

They've already used them as temporary prisons during the WTO protests in Seattle and the Y2K party in Austin.

As a first impression . . .wow, thats kinda scary.

As a second impression: I think you need a more credible source to back those up. If you could get two (best is three) sources to say the same thing, then you would have a solid case.

But, even with the one source. . .scary stuff.

This is one of the few credable conspiracy theores I've heard, kudos.

newswithviews.... interesting. wouldnt that insinuate a biased so-called news source that would naturally lie and bend the truth to suit their own personal agenda?

This is one of the few credable conspiracy theores I've heard, kudos.

I'm agreeing with this one.

Give other sources please, and I'll change my mind.

newswithviews.... interesting. wouldnt that insinuate a biased so-called news source that would naturally lie and bend the truth to suit their own personal agenda?
yeah but it beats foxnews odios lie about being "fair and balanced"

Book bannings are old news.

Christians have been doing that for years! Have to save the minds of the young. Usually that crap goes on in podunk USA.

yeah but it beats foxnews odios lie about being "fair and balanced"

wonderful, the "fox news is bullshit republican propoganda line". and i see you failed to mention an msnbc reporter who was covering the democratic convention refering to edwards as the vice president

This is one of the few credable conspiracy theores I've heard, kudos.

This is as credable as it gets:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/03reg/measures/sb0700.dir/sb0742.intro.html

A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to terrorism; creating new provisions; and amending
section 19, chapter 666, Oregon Laws 2001.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. { + (1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if
the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any
act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to
disrupt:
(a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the
State of Oregon;
(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of
Oregon; or
(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State
of Oregon or its inhabitants.
(2) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person
conspires to do any of the activities described in subsection (1)
of this section.
(3) A person may not be convicted of terrorism except upon the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or upon
confession in open court.
(4)(a) A person convicted of terrorism shall be punished by
imprisonment for life.
(b) When a person is convicted of terrorism under this section,
the court shall order that the person be confined for a minimum
of 25 years without possibility of parole, release to post-prison
supervision, release on work release or any form of temporary
leave or employment at a forest or work camp.



If it is passed, then the act of planning a campus march (any thing that disrupts the educational institution) will be classified as "terrorism" and punishable by life in prison. Not only that, but say you have 1,000 protesters and one of them tries to stop a humvee from entering the parking lot of Halliburtion (any thing that distupts commerce or transportation) -- well, everyone there is now considered a terrorist!! This isn't funny anymore -- this is real and if we don't get a little more pissed-off about it we're going to be force fed prozac and spend our days in a forest work camp!

very rare thankfully but just the same. I'd agree the banning of this book is wrong. I can agree that the anti terrorist bill is wrong though I do not believe activists should be allowed to block roads but nor should they be so severly punished or labeled as terrorists

Out of all the networks fox is my favorite but I don't care for much tv news viewing myself.

This is as credable as it gets:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/03reg/measures/sb0700.dir/sb0742.intro.html

A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to terrorism; creating new provisions; and amending
section 19, chapter 666, Oregon Laws 2001.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. { + (1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if
the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any
act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to
disrupt:
(a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the
State of Oregon;
(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of
Oregon; or
(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State
of Oregon or its inhabitants.
(2) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person
conspires to do any of the activities described in subsection (1)
of this section.
(3) A person may not be convicted of terrorism except upon the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or upon
confession in open court.
(4)(a) A person convicted of terrorism shall be punished by
imprisonment for life.
(b) When a person is convicted of terrorism under this section,
the court shall order that the person be confined for a minimum
of 25 years without possibility of parole, release to post-prison
supervision, release on work release or any form of temporary
leave or employment at a forest or work camp.



If it is passed, then the act of planning a campus march (any thing that disrupts the educational institution) will be classified as "terrorism" and punishable by life in prison. Not only that, but say you have 1,000 protesters and one of them tries to stop a humvee from entering the parking lot of Halliburtion (any thing that distupts commerce or transportation) -- well, everyone there is now considered a terrorist!! This isn't funny anymore -- this is real and if we don't get a little more pissed-off about it we're going to be force fed prozac and spend our days in a forest work camp!

what a crock of shit. walking out on class isnt disrupting the education system, but preventing people who want to go school is. see? there isnt any big conspiracy at work here... oh wait, maybe there is! quick go hide in the panic room and never post here again or the government spooks will give you a lobotomy!

what a crock of shit. walking out on class isnt disrupting the education system, but preventing people who want to go school is. see?

The question here isn't "is walking out on class" a distuption to the education system -- the question is should "disrupting the education system" be classifed as terrorism. This bill would make the definiton of terrorism so vague that it could apply to anything -- does that make you feel safer?


there isnt any big conspiracy at work here... oh wait, maybe there is! quick go hide in the panic room and never post here again or the government spooks will give you a lobotomy!

You know, I provided a link to the state of Oregon's own web site and showed you the actual text for yourself -- you can drawl your own conclusions, but you can't argue that it isn't there:

Senate Bill 742

Sponsored by Senator MINNIS


SUMMARY

The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
brief statement of the essential features of the measure as
introduced.

Creates crime of terrorism. Punishes by life imprisonment.

A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to terrorism; creating new provisions; and amending
section 19, chapter 666, Oregon Laws 2001.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. { + (1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if
the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any
act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to
disrupt:
(a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the
State of Oregon;
(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of
Oregon; or
(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State
of Oregon or its inhabitants.
(2) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person
conspires to do any of the activities described in subsection (1)
of this section.
(3) A person may not be convicted of terrorism except upon the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or upon
confession in open court.
(4)(a) A person convicted of terrorism shall be punished by
imprisonment for life.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/03reg/measures/sb0700.dir/sb0742.intro.html

The question here isn't "is walking out on class" a distuption to the education system -- the question is should "disrupting the education system" be classifed as terrorism. This bill would make the definiton of terrorism so vague that it could apply to anything -- does that make you feel safer?


there isnt any big conspiracy at work here... oh wait, maybe there is! quick go hide in the panic room and never post here again or the government spooks will give you a lobotomy!

You know, I provided a link to the state of Oregon's own web site and showed you the actual text for yourself -- you can drawl your own conclusions, but you can't argue that it isn't there:

Senate Bill 742

Sponsored by Senator MINNIS


SUMMARY

The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
brief statement of the essential features of the measure as
introduced.

Creates crime of terrorism. Punishes by life imprisonment.

A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to terrorism; creating new provisions; and amending
section 19, chapter 666, Oregon Laws 2001.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. { + (1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if
the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any
act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to
disrupt:
(a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the
State of Oregon;
(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of
Oregon; or
(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State
of Oregon or its inhabitants.
(2) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person
conspires to do any of the activities described in subsection (1)
of this section.
(3) A person may not be convicted of terrorism except upon the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or upon
confession in open court.
(4)(a) A person convicted of terrorism shall be punished by
imprisonment for life.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/03reg/measures/sb0700.dir/sb0742.intro.html[/QUOTE]

yes, i saw... its jsut that i dont see anthing really threatening about the bill

So if anyone in any of those industries goes on strike they are committing an act of terrorism?

The unions aren't connected to the mob, they're connected to TERRORISM!

Stupid Law...... :sniper: :p

yes, i saw... its jsut that i dont see anthing really threatening about the bill


You don't seen anything threatening about a the fact that this anti-terrorism bill is clearly aimed at US citizens? You don't see anything threatening about a bill that redefines protesters as terrorist? The new definiton of terrorist doesn't even have anything to do with bombs or killing people, it's all about "disrupting" things, or worse "plans to disrupt" things. Yon don't see anything threatening about a law that would send protesters to forced labor camps?

If this Draconican Neo-con wet dream passes, then you can say kiss liberty good-bye!

yes, i saw... its jsut that i dont see anthing really threatening about the bill

I do. I consider it to be too harsh and unnecessarily repressive. I'm not saying that people should be free to stage disruptive protests, but I think 25-life is a bit steep.

And it's no good saying that 'the courts can tell the difference' because It's still the law & unless I'm very much mistaken, the function of the Courts in the US is to interpret the law, not to re-write or ignore it at their discretion.

PS: I did write a much more comprehensive post on this subject, but when I went to post it, the forum logged me out automatically & I lost the whole thing. :mad:

I do. I consider it to be too harsh and unnecessarily repressive. I'm not saying that people should be free to stage disruptive protests, but I think 25-life is a bit steep.

Not to mention that fact that it isn't terrorism!

Bombing a building is terrorism -- Robbing a bank isn't terrorism, stealing a car isn't terrorism, murder isn't terrorism and protesting sure as hell isn't terrorism -- even an all out riot in the streets isn't terrorism.


PS: I did write a much more comprehensive post on this subject, but when I went to post it, the forum logged me out automatically & I lost the whole thing. :mad:

That happens to me so much that I've gotten into the habbit of saving my posts to a word-document before sending them.

Not to mention that fact that it isn't terrorism!

Bombing a building is terrorism -- Robbing a bank isn't terrorism, stealing a car isn't terrorism, murder isn't terrorism and protesting sure as hell isn't terrorism -- even an all out riot in the streets isn't terrorism.

That was another one of the points in my original post. While there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism, I would argue that the behavior described above does not constitute terrorism within most widely accepted meanings. Although, while murder & robbery aren't necessarily acts of terrorism, they could be in certain circumstances.

Ironically, I once did an international law paper on the legal issues relating to combatants. At one point I remarked that all but the most repressive regimes would recognise that a peaceful protest isn't an act of terrorism. Funny that.

Incidentally, I once participated in an entirely peacful protest that brought traffic to a complete standstill in Brisbane's CBD. I mean, people got out of their cars & just walked away it was that bad. I'm not too sure what the definition of 'intent' is under Oregon law, but it's organisers must have known that marching a large number of people though Brisane's CBD would have this effect. Now had similar laws been enacted here at the time...

Incidentally, I once participated in an entirely peacful protest that brought traffic to a complete standstill in Brisbane's CBD. I mean, people got out of their cars & just walked away it was that bad. I'm not too sure what the definition of 'intent' is under Oregon law, but it's organisers must have known that marching a large number of people though Brisane's CBD would have this effect. Now had similar laws been enacted here at the time...

If the law were passed and enforced back then, the simple fact is you'ld be in a forced labor camp looking up at a guard tower with a great big sign that reads "Work will make you Free."

If the law were passed and enforced back then, the simple fact is you'ld be in a forced labor camp looking up at a guard tower with a great big sign that reads "Work will make you Free."

Nah, it would probably say "Arbeit macht frei"
I mean why print new when perfectly good ones have already been made

Nah, it would probably say "Arbeit macht frei"
I mean why print new when perfectly good ones have already been made

Yeah, and a nice and plainly visible star on your clothes for those who have expressed "anti-american" feelings... That's the land of the free for ya!

If passed as worded,

(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of
Oregon; or
(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State
of Oregon or its inhabitants.

then jaywalkers, idiots who stop their cars in the middle of the street to have a brief conversation with a friend, class clowns who pull a fire alarm could all be considered "terrorists" under this proposed law and would serve harsher penalties than murderers, rapist, and thieves in practically ever state. Yes, I know this is an extreme reading and not what the bill is "meant" to stop, but laws are enforced on the wording and not the intent of the law in our legal system.

The obvious intent of this law is to curb peaceful protest. Under this law, many of the actions of the civil rights movement headed by Martin Luther King, Jr. would be defined as "terrorism."

It is disgraceful how the word terrorism is being redefined. Perhaps we should stop and consider what terrorism actually is:

terrorism

n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear.

It could easily be argued that imprisonment for a minimum of twenty five years is a form of violence. Given the state of prisons, it is certain that someone incarcerated for twenty five years would be upon many occasions subject to actual physical violence.

A law aimed at curbing protest -and thus advancing other goals that are political, religious, or idealogical in nature -by presenting the threat of life imprisonment IS ACTUAL TERRORISM that is being proposed by OUR GOVERNMENTS against US CITIZENS.

One would hope that even those who agree with the actions of the current administration are not so short-sighted that they cannot see the long term and lasting damage that laws like this would do to this nation and to what it means to be an American. What good is all the work, the sacrifices, the lives lost in the current fight against terrorism, the fight to protect our freedoms going to be worth if our government strips of those rights it claims we, the citizens of this nation are fighting to protect?

bump, because i thought this was the most important topic on the board.

what a crock of shit. walking out on class isnt disrupting the education system, but preventing people who want to go school is. see? there isnt any big conspiracy at work here... oh wait, maybe there is! quick go hide in the panic room and never post here again or the government spooks will give you a lobotomy!
*Wooo wooo*
sensing rush limbaugh fan in the immediate vicinity

not to mention clause b and c can easily violate clause a

They already had concentration camps. Look into the 1940's and what they did to Japanese Americans on the west coast.


Lets not forget the Germans and Italians who were rounded up (tens of thousands of them)


The Italians and the Japenese were released right after the war ended.

Most Germans were held until late 1947 early 1948.

The history channel talked about this when it talked about the American Nazi Party and the History behind it. (Most germans went into the internment camps as political moderates and camp out as hardened american nazis. Maybe it had something to do with their being tossed into camps for no reason other than what they were, german)

I'm surprised similar things didn't happen the japense and italians, but then again, they were released right after the war ended.

terrorism

n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear.

Say, isn't how governments operate in general!

A law aimed at curbing protest -and thus advancing other goals that are political, religious, or idealogical in nature -by presenting the threat of life imprisonment IS ACTUAL TERRORISM that is being proposed by OUR GOVERNMENTS against US CITIZENS.


Yes, and now that the Homeland Security Department has turned New York and DC into permanent POLICE STATES, it is clear what the real goal is: TOTAL CONTROL:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=519&e=1&u=/ap/20040804/ap_on_re_us/terror_orange_marathon_1

Two overlooked stories of Fascist Policy here at home:

1) Oregon anti-terrorism law targets protesters

http://www.prisonplanet.com/oregon_law_would_jail_protesters_as_terrorists.html

Apr 2, 8:57 pm ET

By Lee Douglas
PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war demonstrations, critics say.

The bill has met strong opposition but lawmakers still expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state senate judiciary committee, whose Chairman, Republican Senator John Minnis, wrote the proposed legislation.

Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

2) Welcome back to the age of book banning
http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexclusive/exclusive1.htm

April 4, 2003 -- 1:05 am PST
NewsWithViews.com

LAS VEGAS, NV -- Irwin Schiff is a well known author with over 500,000 books in print about the economy and the income tax. He is also now amongst the few who have had a book banned by the U.S. Government. On March 19, 2003, Federal Judge Lloyd George ordered Schiff to stop selling his book "The Federal Mafia" which has been in print for over 13 years. According to Schiff the Federal Government is using the American people's preoccupation with the war in Iraq as an opportunity to squelch freedom here at home.


Books being banned? Protesters defined as terrrorist? What's next, Concentration Camps!?
Oh, I am sure this is the evil conservatives acting up again. *yawn*

wonderful, the "fox news is bullshit republican propoganda line". and i see you failed to mention an msnbc reporter who was covering the democratic convention refering to edwards as the vice president
I didnt see that since patriotic americans have been boycotting MSNBC since they victimized Phil Donahue for speaking out against the unnecessary war in Iraq

I didnt see that since patriotic americans have been boycotting MSNBC since they victimized Phil Donahue for speaking out against the unnecessary war in Iraq
No one spoke up when Michael Savage was kicked off MSNBC, either. It's a two-way street.

Oh, I am sure this is the evil conservatives acting up again. *yawn*

Look kid, I don't know what definition you have for "conservatve," but for me it doesn't describe someone who would propose this legislation:

Senate Bill 742

Sponsored by Senator MINNIS


SUMMARY

The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
brief statement of the essential features of the measure as
introduced.

Creates crime of terrorism. Punishes by life imprisonment.

A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to terrorism; creating new provisions; and amending
section 19, chapter 666, Oregon Laws 2001.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. { + (1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if
the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any
act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to
disrupt:
(a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the
State of Oregon;
(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of
Oregon; or
(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State
of Oregon or its inhabitants.
(2) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person
conspires to do any of the activities described in subsection (1)
of this section.
(3) A person may not be convicted of terrorism except upon the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or upon
confession in open court.
(4)(a) A person convicted of terrorism shall be punished by
imprisonment for life.

So, spare me your partison dribble and ask yourself is this bill sounds like something the Framers of the Constitution would have wanted? Is this what our soldiers have been dying for?

No one spoke up when Michael Savage was kicked off MSNBC, either. It's a two-way street.
but Michael "Savage" Weiner was fired cause hes psychotic

At first I thought it was a joke since it had "Chapter 666" in it, but...


This is a sad day, that a senator will even sponsor this.

Historically, the American gov't has always oppressed citizens during times of war, and I would consider our country in a time of war right now. During World War I anti-war journalists were fired from newspapers and anti-war protesters were jailed. It was believed they would undermine the morale of our citizens. During World War II there is the obvious example of the Japanese Americans who were put in detention camps just for the fact they were Japanese. During Korea, we had the start of the red scare. This doesn't justify book bannings and firings that have happened recently, but it goes to show that history repeats itself.

Look kid, I don't know what definition you have for "conservatve," but for me it doesn't describe someone who would propose this legislation:

Senate Bill 742

Sponsored by Senator MINNIS


SUMMARY

The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
brief statement of the essential features of the measure as
introduced.

Creates crime of terrorism. Punishes by life imprisonment.

A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to terrorism; creating new provisions; and amending
section 19, chapter 666, Oregon Laws 2001.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. { + (1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if
the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any
act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to
disrupt:
(a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the
State of Oregon;
(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of
Oregon; or
(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State
of Oregon or its inhabitants.
(2) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person
conspires to do any of the activities described in subsection (1)
of this section.
(3) A person may not be convicted of terrorism except upon the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or upon
confession in open court.
(4)(a) A person convicted of terrorism shall be punished by
imprisonment for life.

So, spare me your partison dribble and ask yourself is this bill sounds like something the Framers of the Constitution would have wanted? Is this what our soldiers have been dying for?
Well, I have nothing against that bill, but I do not like the way it is being carried out. I do not belive it should be acted against protestors. And I also do not like the anti-American notions when you call our nation Amerika. I am ashamed when I see this, because it seems that these are isolated incidents and have nothing to do with American policy at large. Correct me if im wrong, but I believe you are American, correct? Forgive me if I was too harsh in my original post, but it just seems we have enough Nazi's, French, and other Europeans insulting America that we do not need Americans being anti-American also.

All your threads are belong to us

we do not need Americans being anti-American also.
Here Here!

No one spoke up when Michael Savage was kicked off MSNBC, either. It's a two-way street.

Why would they? Peace and quiet is nice!

Please don't tell me you listen to him? :eek:

Historically, the American gov't has always oppressed citizens during times of war, and I would consider our country in a time of war right now. During World War I anti-war journalists were fired from newspapers and anti-war protesters were jailed. It was believed they would undermine the morale of our citizens. During World War II there is the obvious example of the Japanese Americans who were put in detention camps just for the fact they were Japanese. During Korea, we had the start of the red scare. This doesn't justify book bannings and firings that have happened recently, but it goes to show that history repeats itself.
I agree. If Bush is re-elected, he'll be a lame duck president, free to do whatever because he won't have to run again. Please, I do NOT mean he will be beyond the control of Congress, but as both Houses are heavily Republican, he might get away with a great deal of mischief. As it looks now, we're in deep doodoo. This "war on terror" is expected to last for YEARS, and I'm not so sure we'll still have the Bill of Rights after we "win" it. This is a time we could use some "fair and balanced" reporting, but Fox is fronting for the Republican propaganda machine, and the other networks have their own agendas as well, I'm afraid. As an American, I am terribly sad that I've lived to see this. I was just out of college when Nixon nearly was impeached, and I can remember McCarthyism as well. Let's hope our fears don't come to pass. Unfortunately, too few Americans care enough to vote, and that's where the REAL problem lies. Benjamin Franklin's rejoinder to a question as to what kind of government the Continental Congress instituted bears repeating: "A republic, IF you can keep it." He also predicted that our constitution would eventually fail "as every constitution has". Sobering thoughts, but necessary in these times.

No President is the be all end all, the power ultimately lies w/ the
people.
"If we do not rule ourselves, we will be ruled by tyrants"
Democracy isn't everyone doing what they want just because they can.. that's mob rule. I'm just saying, no matter who wins, we deserve them
because our nation has brought it upon itself.

Why would they? Peace and quiet is nice!

Please don't tell me you listen to him? :eek:
No, I hate the guy. It's just that I'm showing that MSNBC is an equal oppritunity employer.

Well, I have nothing against that bill, but I do not like the way it is being carried out. I do not belive it should be acted against protestors. And I also do not like the anti-American notions when you call our nation Amerika. I am ashamed when I see this, because it seems that these are isolated incidents and have nothing to do with American policy at large. Correct me if im wrong, but I believe you are American, correct? Forgive me if I was too harsh in my original post, but it just seems we have enough Nazi's, French, and other Europeans insulting America that we do not need Americans being anti-American also.

You do not believe it will be acted against protesters, but it will be. Look at the wording.

Amerika is a valid point. I can be as Anti-American as I want (I'm American, FYI), though I'd rather not despair because it won't last more than 4 more years from me, but freedom of speech guarentees I can do whatever I like in print on my country. Ahem- Amerika is a corporate sellout capitalist empire devoted to enslaving the world. Raise the fist! (<-- Doesn't believe in what he said, just in case you didn't catch that)

I still don't get why Nazis get grouped with French and Europe, too. Nazism, since 1945, is a mostly dead political organization, and France and Europe are Countries and Continents...

Well, I have nothing against that bill, but I do not like the way it is being carried out. I do not belive it should be acted against protestors.

Did you even read the bill? WTF -- Are you really that dense!?

And I also do not like the anti-American notions when you call our nation Amerika. I am ashamed when I see this, because it seems that these are isolated incidents and have nothing to do with American policy at large. Correct me if im wrong, but I believe you are American, correct?

I am an American and a Texan, and my political views were forged in the blood of my ancestors who fought under the banner of "Liberty or Death."

I used the "k" in Americka because I can not and will not obey this unAmerican Draconion legislation. I also called it "Soviet" because it clearly violates the US CONSTITUTION.

Forgive me if I was too harsh in my original post, but it just seems we have enough Nazi's, French, and other Europeans insulting America that we do not need Americans being anti-American also.

Dissent is the HIGHEST form of Patriotism - Thomas Jefferson

Soviets don't question their government -- Americans DO!

Technically, the Concentration Camp already exists...

Camp X-Ray anyone?

Camp X-Ray? Please elaborate.

Did you even read the bill? WTF -- Are you really that dense!?



I am an American and a Texan, and my political views were forged in the blood of my ancestors who fought under the banner of "Liberty or Death."

I used the "k" in Americka because I can not and will not obey this unAmerican Draconion legislation. I also called it "Soviet" because it clearly violates the US CONSTITUTION.



Dissent is the HIGHEST form of Patriotism - Thomas Jefferson

Soviets don't question their government -- Americans DO!

Here's a great quote from Theodore Roosevelt in 1918; you guys'll like it:

"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him in so far as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth — whether about the President or about any one else — save in the rare cases where this would make known to the enemy information of military value which would otherwise be unknown to him."

Camp X-Ray? Please elaborate.

That's the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

That's the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Thanks! Sorry if that was a stupid question.

Thanks! Sorry if that was a stupid question.

No problem! Here's an interesting op-ed on the current state of the union:
http://www.mackwhite.com

By Mack White

We can of course hope that the SUMMER OF TERROR will pass without incident.

And we can hope too that, when the summer has passed, it will not be followed by an Autumn of Terror, a Winter of Terror, a Spring of Terror, or another Summer of Terror, and on and on.

But hoping ain’t getting. We have got to take seriously the government's threats--and that's what they are, they are threats, not warnings--that there will be another terror attack on US soil and that it will be worse than September 11 and will lead to a suspension of the election and the Constitution.

And if we take that seriously, we should consider what that means in stark, human terms—that is, we should recognize that, right now, somewhere on this continent, are thousands of people as alive as you and I, living their lives, who will die in this coming attack. (I say it is coming, because the government says it is coming.)

Perhaps you passed someone on the street today who will die in that future attack. Perhaps you personally know someone. Perhaps it will be someone dear to you. Perhaps it will be you.

Or it may not be you or anyone you know. Doesn’t matter. You will still be a victim, for you will have to live in the world that will follow. And that world will be unrecognizable to you.

If you think this nation was dramatically changed by September 11, just wait till you see what this nation will look like a year from now—if the criminals in charge of our government are successful. It will be Hell on Earth.

You may not believe, as I do, that these "warnings" from Tom Ridge are actually threats. Fine. But, even when you put the best face on it--as Howard Dean did in the article linked in the blog entry below--even if you allow yourself to believe that the Bush administration is only issuing bogus "warnings" for political purposes, what is this but an attempt to manipulate you through fear? And isn't that the definition of terrorism?

But, as I say, I do not put the best face on it. I see Tom Ridge's "warnings" as threats, pure and simple. And, judging by the evidence of September 11, we cannot assume these are empty threats. The Bush administration and its globalist masters are perfectly capable of killing as many people as they have to, in order to terrorize them into accepting the slavery of the New World Order.

Does this scare you? It should. And it should also make you angry. And you should use that anger now, while you still have a chance, to fight the New World Order.

I do not advocate violence. For one thing, I have not been in a fight since I was a sophomore in high school almost four decades ago. I would like to maintain my clean record.

For another, we should remember that this is not 1776. We cannot grab our guns and march on Tyranny. Not only would it be suicidal, it would play right into the tyrants' hands, for it would be used to discredit dissent and empower the Police State.

However, we have a very powerful weapon at our disposal that, so far, is not illegal: it’s called the Truth.

In a time when the greater portion of the population is slumbering under the spell of Fox News and other mainstream media outlets, the most important thing we can do is spread information and wake up everyone we know to the Truth.

The Truth, as I say, is our most powerful weapon. It is the Light that obliterates the Darkness that evil men need to accomplish their deeds, and it is also what sets us Free.

Thanks! By the way, what did you think of the T.R. quote?

Did you even read the bill? WTF -- Are you really that dense!?



I am an American and a Texan, and my political views were forged in the blood of my ancestors who fought under the banner of "Liberty or Death."

I used the "k" in Americka because I can not and will not obey this unAmerican Draconion legislation. I also called it "Soviet" because it clearly violates the US CONSTITUTION.



Dissent is the HIGHEST form of Patriotism - Thomas Jefferson

Soviets don't question their government -- Americans DO!

I totally agree with your statements. As American citizens it is our obligation to question the policies of the government. Remind me why the first amendment was created again? Oh yeah! To prevent the gov't from "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peacably to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress of grievances".

I should point out that a soviet is a worker council. It has nothing specifically to do with Marxism and some anarchists call proposed worker organizations in anarchism "free soviets".

Here's a great quote from Theodore Roosevelt in 1918; you guys'll like it:

"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him in so far as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth — whether about the President or about any one else — save in the rare cases where this would make known to the enemy information of military value which would otherwise be unknown to him."


I'm a bit perplexed... on the one hand, I want to agree with it as many great points are made, but the last line keeps striking me in the eye. The obvious quesiton is; "what constitutes an enemy?" Many would have considered anyone the House of UnAmerican Activities questioned an "enemy." During Roosevelt's era, he often bashed the muckrakers for fueling the "anarchist," would he consider them the enemy and silenced the voices of Mrs. Tarbel and so many others?

Then there is the fact that Roosevelt was an Imperialist who used the Monroe Doctrine as an excuse to raid Latin America... I would have opposed that war and Roosevelt probably would have considered me an "enemy."

I just can't stand by this quote, not only because of who said it, but also because of the "enemy" clause.

Well, I have nothing against that bill, but I do not like the way it is being carried out. I do not belive it should be acted against protestors.

I'm not quite sure of your meaning here. Could you please clarify? Do you mean that you aren't against the notion of the bill but think it goes too far, or do you agree with the wording of the Bill but do not believe it should be enforced with regard to protesters or something else entirely?

My personal beef with the law is that: The sentence is far more harsh than the crime warrants
The defininition of 'terrorism' goes against the widely accepted meaning of the term and I suspect that it's use in this context is an unjust ploy to vilify anyone who opposes the current administration by labeling tham terrorists (a term that currently has highly emotional connotations, particularly in the US)
If enacted, the Bill would place unnecessary restrictions on people's rights to voice their opinions.

And since it seems to have become an issue in this discussion, I am not an American. I'm Austalian. However I am also a lawyer by training & therefore I take an interest in law reform, international & comparative law & global politics.

I should also point out that this bill isn't just the work of some nobody in Oregon, but is actually the work of the Republican Party leadership!

About the author of this "ACT"

http://news.statesmanjournal.com/Legislature/legislator.cfm?i=73

Senator John Minnis
Party Affiliation: Republican
Year Entered Legislature: 1985
Chair of Committee(s):
Judiciary
Vice-Chair of Committee(s):
General Government
Member of Committee(s):
Health Policy


After 19 years of pushing his fascist agenda Legislative branch - he has decided to make a career move to an Executive position where he can enjoy all of the jack-boot tactics he's legalized:
http://governor.oregon.gov/Gov/press_112403.shtml

Governor Ted Kulongoski today formally announced his intent to appoint Senator John Minnis as Director of the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST) on January 2, 2004, with the appointment to take effect the same day.
...
The department of Public Safety Standards and Training oversees the training and certification of thousands of Oregon’s police, fire, private security, and other emergency personnel. In addition to being home to graduating police officers for 10 week increments, the DPSST hosts training classes in Basic Police, Basic Corrections, Basic Parole and Probation, Career Office Development, Supervision, Middle Management, Basic Telecommunications, Campus Public Safety and other classes related to the field of public safety.

Not to mention the fact that his wife is the House Majority Leader:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/house/majoritybio.htm

On second thought I have concluded that the bill is not just aimed at protesters of government action. It has also been written to help strip workers of their rights, as striking would unquestionably interupt business.

On second thought I have concluded that the bill is not just aimed at protesters of government action. It has also been written to help strip workers of their rights, as striking would unquestionably interupt business.


It's the same as the Red Scare at the turn of the century, it's just a way to frighten Americans enough to turn them into surfs... if the corporations had their way, we'd still being seeing images like this: http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~hius202/images/lecture09/bodieslowered.htm#text