Jump to content
Heads Up! This website is no longer maintained, if your a member from our era, consider joining the discord to say hello.
Sign in to follow this  

Your Rights are gone

Recommended Posts

Hello all, as I was browsing the Ghoztcraft world news to see if there were any related topics to this situation, the closest one I could find was the internet censorship posted by JoshJayK. Well here today I have decided that it is very important to talk about what is going on in the world. Well where should I begin? Lets start with the NDAA (National Defense authorization act.)

 

First lets identify what the NDAA is. The NDAA is -

WASHINGTON — Congress is pressing ahead with a massive $662 billion defense bill that requires military custody for terrorism suspects linked to al-Qaida, including those captured within the U.S., with lawmakers hoping their last-minute revisions will mollify President Barack Obama and eliminate a veto threat.

 

Leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees announced late Monday that they had reached agreement on the policy-setting legislation that had gotten caught up in an escalating fight on whether to treat suspected terrorists as prisoners of war or criminals in the civilian justice system.

 

Responding to personal appeals from Obama and his national security team, the lawmakers added language on national security waivers and other changes that they hoped would ensure administration support for the overall bill.

 

"I assured the president that we were working on additional assurances, that the concerns were not accurate," Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., who spoke to Obama last week, told reporters at a news conference. "That we'd do everything we could to make sure they were allayed, and met."

 

White House officials said Tuesday they were reviewing the bill. It was unclear whether they would hold firm on the veto threat.

 

Overall, the bill would authorize $662 billion for military personnel, weapons systems, national security programs in the Energy Department, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1. Reflecting a period of austerity and a winding down of decade-old conflicts, the bill is $27 billion less than Obama requested and $43 billion less than Congress gave the Pentagon for fiscal 2011.

 

The legislation would impose tough new sanctions on Iran, targeting foreign financial institutions that do business with the Central Bank in Tehran. Levin said the negotiators made some changes to address concerns of the Treasury Department, but he said the legislation is "96 percent" of what the Senate had unanimously backed.

 

One of the measure's chief sponsors welcomed the results. "Moving forward, the Congress will need to be more vigilant than ever before in holding the administration's feet to the fire to collapse the Central Bank of Iran and force international financial institutions to choose between doing business in the U.S. and doing business in Iran," said Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill.

 

Reflecting growing public weariness with more than a decade of war in Afghanistan, the bill requires the president to develop options to accelerate the ability of the Afghanistan National Security Forces to take responsibility for the country's protection, with benchmarks on progress.

 

The lawmakers said they hoped the House and Senate could vote on the final bill by Thursday and send it to the president.

 

The issue of how to handle captured terrorist suspects has divided Obama's senior national security officials and Congress, as well as Democrats and Republicans.

 

The administration insists that military, law enforcement and intelligence officials need flexibility in prosecuting the war on terror. Obama points to his administration's successes in eliminating Osama bin Laden and radical Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Republicans counter that their efforts are necessary to respond to an evolving, post-Sept. 11 threat, and that Obama has failed to produce a consistent policy on handling terror suspects.

 

The bill would require that the military take custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates who is involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States, with an exemption for U.S. citizens.

 

Responding to appeals from Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and FBI Director Robert Mueller, lawmakers added a provision that says nothing in the bill will affect "existing criminal enforcement and national security authorities of the FBI or any other domestic law enforcement agency" with regard to a captured suspect, "regardless of whether such ... person is held in military custody."

 

The bill also says the president can waive the provision based on national security. Originally that authority rested with the defense secretary.

 

House and Senate negotiators dropped several of the provisions in the House bill that also had drawn a veto threat, including the requirement of military tribunals for all cases.

 

"We took significant steps to address the administration's concerns," Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, the top Democrat on the House panel, told reporters.

 

The legislation would deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention. The lawmakers made no changes to that language.

 

Civil rights groups still pressed for a presidential veto.

 

"The sponsors of the bill monkeyed around with a few minor details, but all of the core dangers remain – the bill authorizes the president to order the military to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others found far from any battlefield, even in the United States itself. The bill strikes at the very heart of American values," Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. "Based on suspicion alone, no place and no person are off-limits to military detention without charge or trial."

 

The bill would go after foreign financial institutions that do business with Iran's central bank by barring them from opening or maintaining correspondent operations in the United States. It would apply to foreign central banks only for transactions that involve the sale or purchase of petroleum or petroleum products.

 

The petroleum penalties would only apply if the president, in six months, determines there is a sufficient alternative supply and if the country with jurisdiction over the financial institution has not significantly reduced its purchases of Iranian oil. It also allows the president to waive the penalties based on national security.

 

In a reflection of the uneasy relationship between the United States and Pakistan, the bill would freeze some $700 million in assistance until Pakistan comes up with a strategy to deal with improvised explosive devices.

 

The problem within this bill is the wording of the bill and also the follow up of the bill. What do I mean? declares the entire USA to be a "battleground" upon which U.S. military forces can operate with impunity, overriding Posse Comitatus and granting the military the unchecked power to arrest, detain, interrogate and even assassinate U.S. citizens with impunity. Which is taking our rights as "americans" away. Not only that, we soon discover that the administration it self asked for the bill to be edited so the part were it says "It will not contain to the american people" is basically removed. Which can be watched here

 

But information and knowledge is a powerful thing. The more information we obtained the more dangerous we become to "the corrupt" government. They know this and already control most of the information that is given to us. This includes, our tv, radio, news papers. But one thing the government does not control is our internet. But they know this and our now trying to get control of that.

 

How you might ask? Well the bill that was created named Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). In short this bill will,

The bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Depending on who requests the court orders, the actions could include barring online advertising networks and payment facilitators such as PayPal from doing business with the allegedly infringing website, barring search engines from linking to such sites, and requiring Internet service providers to block access to such sites
So under this bill, there is a possibility that Ghoztcraft it self will get shut down! Also under this bill it takes our rights yet again.

 

But wait! Lets see the congressmen defend/talk about this bill while being created and or changed.

 

So a man like mel watt that has no idea nor have worked with the computer first hand our making these bills! This is not only insane it self! But as you can see the government is scared that the american people obtaining the real truths and lies and deception they perceive through the "real media"

 

its time to open our eyes, realize here in America that this has been in process for several years. With each biil that is passed and signed unnoticed is yet breaking down and destroying our bill of rights and constitution of America. I am here to educate and inform people the real truth and its time to realize what is really going on in this world!

 

SOURCES:

http://www.youtube.com

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/13/national-defense-authorization-act-ndaa-obama-detainee-policy_n_1145407.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Edited by Cripp

Share this post


Link to post

I can understand how some people would like to have the army and other authorities to be able to act arrest, interrogate, and potentially kill. But it is taking rights away from citizens. God forbid if we put trial to potential terrorist in America. I heard one argument saying "If a l terrorist is put on trial and is judged "innocent", that potential terrorist once let free can go kill people!". Well If they do their fucking job right we don't have to worry about letting them free. I feel like they want to pass this bill so they can do things easier, without actually doing a trial.

 

However if this bill is passed I won't be upset compared to others. My worry is the ignorant and bias people who could use this to prosecute an innocent person.

 

For the internet security bill it shouldn't affect majority of websites since most make sure to stay away from copyright infringement and enforce such things already. so in my opinion it probably won't even do much to the major websites but I don't know what scale our government will go to. I still don't like it. It reminds me of what China is doing with their internet security. Their's people in china who don't even know what happened in Tienanmen square, nor the huge riots that went on. and it would be easy for our government to do so.

Share this post


Link to post

 

However if this bill is passed I won't be upset compared to others. My worry is the ignorant and bias people who could use this to prosecute an innocent person.

 

 

First off, I wan't to make it clear. I have absolutely NOTHING against us citizens and I actually respect what USA once stood for. But if we put beside the patriotic ego America is not what it once used to be, the political system is corrupt and corporations are what run the states. Not only am I afraid but I almost doubt that this will not be abused. Those scary stories of abuse by authorities we hear and see in movies where legal authorities ruin innocent peoples lives is now a potential future? To a point where they abduct/kill and who knows what else and now they have the legal right?

 

I used to watch these conspiracy theory videos on things like this and it made me laugh but day by day I have to question the "official story" on whats going on.

 

Personally as a law abiding citizen of Canada, I would actually be happy is the Canadian Forces were in control of Canada but obviously if they do not abuse it. I don't think ever will there be a completely just government/power. You can dig deep into this rabbit hole and there's some nasty stuff... I just hope the people in the situation do good with it. Because we need to remember many things in life can be put to good use or they can be put to negative. Whether we are talking about kitchen knives, rifles, or RFID chips lol. Lets just hope the government keeps its people in mind.

Share this post


Link to post

I find it weird how when Obama was running for president he addressed the issue of putting people in prison without trial. and now this issue is coming up Obama might not veto this bill. I hate politicians so many of them are hypocrites and only care about self gain.

Share this post


Link to post

I hate to relate to videos to explain things. But here is a little more detailed on SOPA. This man explains it really well actually.

 

The mega upload song he speaks of in the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCkI5I8vsBg

Share this post


Link to post

@ Speedskater : J.F.K. was the last real president USA has had. I think Obama had good intentions but these corporations are like a disease. I honestly don't think Obama or any other president has the legitimate opportunity to actually make an authentic and original impact on the way the nation heads towards it's future.

 

@ SOPA: Man that's a load of crap.. I mean like when SOPA is in full effect browsing the internet can get pretty biased, it would ruin the whole beauty of the internet. Free flow of information. Censorship is a terrible path to go down and day by day it will become a tighter grasp they have on this info. But more importantly people around the loop we are in will always have ways to circumvent the issue.

 

The problem is: the masses who are computer iliterate will actually have a channeled stream of information and vital events will not be able to be spread. If you think about it, it is pretty bad as it is. Ask yourself this: what is the last website you found on your own? (keep in mind things you can search on your favourite search engine doesn't count) You will realize almost any major website you visit, you only know of is all because google or w.e other website you use has directed you to it.

 

 

Fuck SOPA and fuck Protect IP the internet should be untouched. I actually think our luck and best hope is something like facebook, why? A lot of people use facebook, if facebook is shutdown or effected in a negative manner I can see the masses arguing and spreading their voice.

Share this post


Link to post

@ Speedskater : J.F.K. was the last real president USA has had.

 

 

Fuck SOPA and fuck Protect IP the internet should be untouched. I actually think our luck and best hope is something like facebook, why? A lot of people use facebook, if facebook is shutdown or effected in a negative manner I can see the masses arguing and spreading their voice.

 

For J.F.K I agree and that is why he was probably assassinated. As the same goes for his brother Robbert Kennedy. He won the polls in California and they knew he was a "threat" so they assassinated him too.

 

We can not let it get to that point for I believe facebook is where most information is spread to the people quickly and efficiently. So lets hope it does not get to that point where it has to be taken down for people to wake up.

Share this post


Link to post

This is all the Congress Censoring the internet thing, or is it something different?

 

Edit:

 

READ THE ARTICLE BEFORE POSTING

 

(- rep)

Thanks for that :D

 

I tried reading it, but got kind of confused...

Edited by fanimorph
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'd rather have our government focusing on our dollar. I never knew how fast inflation can act. I might be ignorant and what would be the best method of to save out economy. But I know the plan they all agreed on a while ago can't be it.

Oh and for a laugh

Share this post


Link to post

This was a good post! I've been keeping up with the news about this for a while but never thought about posting it here!

 

Quick question: Have they found a constitutional loophole around the due process/writ of habeas corpus? Won't the supreme court deem this unconstitutional?

Share this post


Link to post

@ speedskater if you want to focus on the dollar, go here http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1110PSITESVD/6PSIMC35/PR

 

 

Josh - No loop hole really because the purpose of the bills are to deteriorate our constitution and rights....

Edited by Cripp

Share this post


Link to post

And the justices are okay with this?

Keep in mind who puts the people in the supreme court seats. The president. But I only skimmed the surface of this issue. If you are really interested in this topic please do your own research and educate yourself! Alot of things tie into these bills. But I will post a more detailed post of more of the issues soon enough.

Edited by Cripp

Share this post


Link to post

if you want to focus on the dollar, go here http://www.stansberr...SVD/6PSIMC35/PR

I like what he said up until he tried to sell stuff to me. besides I'm only 19 and currently jobless so investments are quite hard for me.

Share this post


Link to post

PART 2:

Now that we have established the basics of these bills and read between "the lines" of the biil to realized what the government is actually doing. I want to take a little history trip in time to show this has been going on for years. Some believe that FDR knew about pearl harbor before it was going to happen, JFK was an inside job. But I want to go back nearly 2 decades ago. 20 years. Bill Clinton the president I mostly grew up with in my Child hood, wanted to pass the "Brady bill."

 

What is the Brady bill?

The law requires a prospective handgun buyer to wait five business days while the authorities check on his or her background, during which time the sale is approved or prohibited based on an established set of criteria.

 

The Problem - the people of America were not going to have that! Bill Clinton is trying to take away our Second Amendment rights to Bear arms! Not only was the bill under heavy pressure of not going to pass, but also Clinton's 2nd term was coming up for election.

 

Does anyone recall the 1993 bombing in the world trade centers? Well this was actually the first attempted by "the corrupt" government to kill enough U.S citizens to get this bill to pass. It failed horribly only killing about 5 people from the bombing and didnt change anything. A lot of people ask me why would are government kill our own people. They simply can not wrap there heads around such a terrible thing. As you learned in economy video I posted above, we call this Normal Biases. Where we as people believe this WOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO US. Its impossible and unlikely that is will ever happen. Just like it was impossible for Kim jung IL and Hitler to do the same to there own people.

 

 

Now does anyone remember what happened in 1995? No? In 1995 Oklahoma City (OKC) Bombing happened.

terrorist bomb attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. It was the most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until the September 11, 2001 attacks. The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children under the age of 6, and injured more than 680 people. The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings within a sixteen-block radius, destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings. The bomb was estimated to have caused at least $652 million worth of damage

 

The New problem: The first 24 hours News caster's were telling the truth on what has happened, after that the only channel that kept telling the truth was Channel 4. Soon to be bought out by the new york times, Not only everyone that was working on the OKC bombing was fired from Channel 4 but also was black balled and could never work in TV AGAIN. Not only that, a book The Final Jihad: When the "Best of the Worst" Finally Come for Us had a published date in 1994.... But was changed in 1996. Why is that important? Well this book explains the exact same attack that would happen in OKC and also explains that will eventually happen in 9/11! Well how would this Auhor (Martin Keating) know anything before it happened? Martin Keating is the BROTHER of Francis Anthony "Frank" Keating

is an American politician from Oklahoma. Keating served as the 25th Governor of Oklahoma. His first term began in 1995 and ended in 1999.

 

After this fake attack from the government, and showing all the death of the adults and KIDS. Clinton got the Brady bill to pass and states he owes the bombing for his reelection for his 2nd term. Basically stripping our 2nd Amendment away by creating "nationalism" and showing the emotional aspect to the american people.

 

How does this tie into now? Not only does Obama and the administration clearly state how another OKC bombing could help them (dont be surprised if another attack is staged.) But People want a "Secure" country, people want to feel safe and "not be afraid" of another attack. Which is now creating bills like the NDAA. Yet another bill going to strip our rights away as Americans. But did hitler and Kim Jung IL stop there no. Now neither will the United states.

 

You thought the NDAA was bad? Well now there is leaked information of FEMA camps being created across the united States and they are ready to be staffed.

Internment Camp Services Bid Arrives After NDAA

 

KBR’s call for FEMA camp service bids arrives soon after the Senate overwhelmingly passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which permits the military to detain and interrogate supposed domestic terror suspects in violation of the Fourth Amendment and Posse Comitatus.

 

Section 1031 of the NDAA bill declares the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allows American citizens to be arrested on U.S. soil and incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay.

 

A number of civil liberties groups have come out in strong opposition to the legislation, most notably the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), the nation’s oldest and largest Asian American civil and human rights organization.

 

In a letter addressed to Congress, S. Floyd Mori, the national director of JACL, said the NDAA is the first time that Congress has scaled back on the protections provided by the Non-Detention Act of 1971. Mori said the legislation, if enacted and put into use, would be reminiscent of the unconstitutional indefinite detention of Japanese Americans during World War II.

 

Police State 4: The Rise of FEMA.

 

KBR Instrumental in Establishing Camps in 2006

 

In 2006, KBR was awarded a contingency contract from the Department of Homeland Security, allegedly to support its Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities in the event of an emergency, Market Watch reported.

 

The contract was effective immediately and provided for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to expand existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs, KBR said. The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency, such as a natural disaster, the company explained.

 

The regions indicated in the KBR document.

 

Army Releases Civilian Inmate Labor Program Document

 

Soon after KBR’s announcement, a little-known Army document surfaced. Entitled the “Civilian Inmate Labor Program,” the unclassified document describes in detail Army Regulation 210-35. The regulation, first drafted in 1997, underwent a “rapid act revision” in January 2005 and now provides a policy for the creation of labor programs and prison camps on Army installations.

 

National Emergency Centers Act

 

In 2009, the National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 was introduced in Congress. It mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill.

 

In addition to emergencies, the legislation is designed to “meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security,” an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse, as Paul Joseph Watson noted in January of 2009.

 

Clergy response teams.

 

Also in 2009, the Army National Guard began posting advertisements calling for Internment/Resettlement Specialists, a fact noted by Infowars.com, Prison Planet.com and other alternative media outlets but ignored by the establishment media.

 

Precursor: Rex 84 Mass Detention Operation

 

Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was established under the pretext of a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossing the Mexican/US border, the same pretense used in the language of the KBR request for services.

 

During the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987, however, it was revealed that the program was a secretive “scenario and drill” developed by the federal government to suspend the Constitution, declare martial law, assign military commanders to take over state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens determined by the government to be “national security threats.”

 

Rex 84 was devised by Col. Oliver North, who was with the NSC and appointed liaison to FEMA. John Brinkerhoff, the deputy director of “national preparedness” programs for FEMA, and North designed the plan on a 1970 report written by FEMA chief Louis Giuffrida, at the Army War College, which proposed the detention of up to 21 million “American Negroes” in the event of a black militant uprising in the United States.

 

DHS Coordinating Occupy Arrests

 

Following a crackdown by police on Occupy Wall Street protesters around the nation, Oakland, California, mayor Jean Quan mentioned during an interview with the BBC that she was on a conference call with leaders of 18 US cities shortly before a wave of raids broke up Occupy Wall Street encampments across the country. It was later discovered that the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and other federal police agencies had coordinated the often violent response to the protests.

 

New York Rep. Peter King, who heads up the House Homeland Security Subcommittee, signaled a sense of urgency when he said the federal government has “to be careful not to allow this movement to get any legitimacy. I’m taking this seriously in that I’m old enough to remember what happened in the 1960′s when the left-wing took to the streets and somehow the media glorified them and it ended up shaping policy. We can’t allow that to happen.”

 

The federal government responded similarly in the 1960s and 70s when the FBI organized and unleashed its unconstitutional secret police under the covert banner of COINTELPRO.

 

In addition to the DHS characterizing Americans supporting states’ rights and the Constitution as terrorists, the Defense Department’s Antiterrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course in 2009 advised its personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism.”

 

Elements of the Police State Coming Together

 

The KBR document is more evidence that the federal government has established internment camps and plans to fill them with dissidents and anti-government activists that have been demonized consistently by the establishment media.

 

The NDAA was crafted precisely to provide the legal mechanism for tasking the military to round up activists it conflates with al-Qaeda terrorists. The plan was initially envisioned by Rex 84 and in particular Operation Garden Plot, an operational plan to use the Army, USAF, Navy, and Marine Corp. in direct support of civil disturbance control operations. It has since added numerous elements under the rubric of Continuity of Government, the overall war on terror, civil disturbance and emergency response.

 

The government has patiently put into place the crucial elements of its police state grid and overarching plan for the internment of political enemies.

 

We are quite literally one terror event away from the plan going live. As the DHS and the establishment media keep telling us, the next terror event will be on American soil and not the work of al-Qaeda but domestic patriot political groups. The FBI has specialized in creating domestic terrorists – or rather patsies – and shifting the blame over to their political enemies.

 

Video:

 

 

Sources:

http://www.infowars.com/exclusive-government-activating-fema-camps-across-u-s/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Keating

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/brady-bill-signed-into-law

Edited by Cripp

Share this post


Link to post

Random Facts:

The military is planned to work the same way in the united states that they do in Iran/Iraq. Which is Blue and red, Blue are the good guys and the red are of course are the bad guys. In the united states the blue people will have "id cards" to show they are on the blue team. the rest are red team.

 

5 billion dollars on the TSA in airports.. How many Terrorist have they found? 0. Anyone else see whats wrong here?

 

USA wants to put MORE random TSA stops with in the United States. The TSA are not law enforcement, they do not take an oath under the constitutions.

 

CIA Asset Anwar al-Awlaki... AKA CIA lackey.

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T98QHHD35I

Share this post


Link to post

We go out on news year eve with a bang here in America. Where Obama signs the NDAA bill.

After a long battle over one section of the latest National Defense Authorization Act, President Obama signed the bill into law today - but with a signing statement. The statement, which can be read in full here, clarifies why Obama signed the bill and how the controversial provisions on indefinite detention will be treated. Although Obama says in the statement that he does not agree with the entire bill, passing it is necessary to maintain the operation of our military. He also added that the indefinite detention provision (section 1021) just codifies how our military currently operates rather than changing anything, and that "my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens."

 

While the indefinite detention provisions included in this act do echo similar measures included in the 2001 AUMF, many civil liberties groups were concerned that this section could be grounds for a more expansive interpretation of those powers that could allow for arrests of U.S. citizens without a trial. While the signing statement is not technically legally binding, it does give intent for how the section should be interpreted by future courts, and in all likelihood will ensure that section 1021 only applies to enemy combatants. It's not perfect, but it is a lot more efficient than vetoing the bill and restarting the legislative process.

 

The signing statement and its assurance that the Obama Administration will not apply section 1021 to U.S. Citizens may do very little to assuage the fears of civil libertarians who fear that this law sets a dangerous precedent for future administrations. While the President did successfully campaign to have some of the more aggressive detention provisions removed (such as a military custody requirement for U.S. citizens suspected of terror), the continued existence of this provision has allowed the story to survive.

 

"I know It says it says it adds the American citizens in this bill but dont worry I would never do that without trial"

 

Sources:

http://www.ology.com/politics/obama-signs-ndaa-bill-signing-statement-clarifying-indefinite-detention-provisions/12312011

Share this post


Link to post

SOPA IS STILL AROUND.

 

Hello all, I wanted to revamp this topic to help get the word out on sopa. This bill was not thrown away or vetoed. It was just pushed to this year!!!

 

What is sopa again?

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), also known as H.R. 3261, is a bill that was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on October 26, 2011, by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) and a bipartisan group of 12 initial co-sponsors. The bill expands the ability of U.S. law enforcement and copyright holders to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property and counterfeit goods.[2] Now before the House Judiciary Committee, it builds on the similar PRO-IP Act of 2008 and the corresponding Senate bill, the PROTECT IP Act.[3]

 

The originally proposed bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Depending on who requests the court orders, the actions could include barring online advertising networks and payment facilitators such as PayPal from doing business with the allegedly infringing website, barring search engines from linking to such sites, and requiring Internet service providers to block access to such sites. The bill would make unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content a crime, with a maximum penalty of five years in prison for 10 such infringements within six months. The bill also gives immunity to Internet services that voluntarily take action against websites dedicated to infringement, while making liable for damages any copyright holder who knowingly misrepresents that a website is dedicated to infringement.[4]

 

Proponents of the bill say it protects the intellectual property market and corresponding industry, jobs and revenue, and is necessary to bolster enforcement of copyright laws especially against foreign websites.[5] They cite examples such as Google's $500 million settlement with the Department of Justice for its role in a scheme to target U.S. consumers with ads to buy illegal prescription drugs from Canadian pharmacies. Opponents say that it violates the First Amendment,[6] is Internet censorship,[7] will cripple the Internet,[8] and will threaten whistle-blowing and other free speech.[6][9]

 

The House Judiciary Committee held hearings on SOPA on November 16 and December 15, 2011. The Committee is scheduled to continue debate when Congress returns from its winter recess.[10]

 

Dont be fooled though yes this one is getting a lot of attention from people around the world. But this is how congress works. They present you with TWO yes thats correct TWO bills. One (like sopa) which is super harsh and just outrageous that catches everyone's attention! and another (like protect IP.) which is just as harmful but is not seen by everyone or noticed. and eventually the 2nd bill passes.

 

What is the Protect IP?

The PROTECT IP Act (Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011; United States Senate Bill S.968) is a proposed law with the stated goal of giving the US government and copyright holders additional tools to curb access to "rogue websites dedicated to infringing or counterfeit goods", especially those registered outside the U.S.[1] The bill was introduced on May 12, 2011 by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT)[2] and 11 initial bipartisan co-sponsors. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that implementation of the bill would cost the federal government $47 million through 2016, to cover enforcement costs and the hiring and training of 22 new special agents and 26 support staff.[3] The Senate Judiciary Committee passed the bill, but Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) placed a hold on it.[4]

 

The PROTECT IP Act is a re-write of the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA),[5] which failed to pass in 2010. A similar House version of the bill, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)[6] was introduced on October 26, 2011.[7]

 

Dont let either one of these bills be passed and dont be fooled thinking because we stopped one of them means the other bill disappears.

 

Sopa%20son.jpg

 

 

Video:

 

 

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Youtube.com

My own image.

Share this post


Link to post

CISPA is a different name for SOPA. Late to the game but always here to help.

CISPA could allow any private company to share vast amounts of sensitive, private data about its customers with the government.

 

CISPA would override all other federal and state privacy laws, and allow a private company to share nearly anything—from the contents of private emails and Internet browsing history to medical, educational and financial records—as long as it “directly pertains to” a “cyber threat,” which is broadly defined.

 

CISPA does not require that data shared with the government be stripped of unnecessary personally-identifiable information. A private company may choose to anonymize the data it shares with the government. However, there is no requirement that it does so—even when personally-identifiable information is unnecessary for cybersecurity measures. For example, emails could be shared with the full names of their authors and recipients. A company could decide to leave the names of its customers in the data it shares with the government merely because it does not want to incur the expense of deleting them. This is contrary to the recommendations of the House Republican Cybersecurity Task Force and other bills to authorize information sharing, which require companies to make a reasonable effort to minimize the sharing of personally-identifiable information.

 

CISPA would allow the government to use collected private information for reasons other than cybersecurity. The government could use any information it receives for “any lawful purpose” besides “regulatory purposes,” so long as the same use can also be justified by cybersecurity or the protection of national security. This would provide no meaningful limit—a government official could easily create a connection to “national security” to justify nearly any type of investigation.

 

CISPA would give Internet Service Providers free rein to monitor the private communications and activities of users on their networks. ISPs would have wide latitude to do anything that can be construed as part of a “cybersecurity system,” regardless of any other privacy or telecommunications law.

 

CISPA would empower the military and the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect information about domestic Internet users. Other information sharing bills would direct private information from domestic sources to civilian agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security. CISPA contains no such limitation. Instead, the Department of Defense and the NSA could solicit and receive information directly from American companies, about users and systems inside the United States.

 

CISPA places too much faith in private companies, to safeguard their most sensitive customer data from government intrusion. While information sharing would be voluntary under CISPA, the government has a variety of ways to pressure private companies to share large volumes of customer information. With complete legal immunity, private companies have few clear incentives to resist such pressure. There is also no requirement that companies ever tell their customers what they have shared with the government, either before or after the fact. As informed consumers, Americans expect technology companies to have clear privacy policies, telling us exactly how and when the company will use and share our personal data, so that we can make informed choices about which companies have earned our trust and deserve our business.

 

Source: http://lofgren.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/042312%20lofgren%20cispa%20concerns.pdf

 

 

Like I have said to many. Sopa may be "gone for the time being" but they will introduce more bills just like sopa or even harsher.... The goal? Well they eventually give you an option which a lot of people fall for. they give you one very harsh bill like CISPA here. Then republish Sopa in a different name and show how they have cut down the bill and made it less harsh... When in reality they slip what they want into the bill originally. Do not be fooled by these tricks.

Share this post


Link to post

"Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal "

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

 

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

 

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

 

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

 

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance."

 

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

 

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

 

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

 

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.

 

Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

 

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

 

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

 

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

 

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

 

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal.”

 

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

 

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.

 

Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.

Source: http://rt.com/usa/news/348-act-tresspass-buildings-437/

 

Pretty sad when you hear no one talk about this then it just gets slipped into politics and slides by with no resilience at all.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah I'm surprised there isn't a big uproar over this... Has Senate already voted this bill into law?

Share this post


Link to post

One step closer to a communist America.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah I'm surprised there isn't a big uproar over this... Has Senate already voted this bill into law?

Just got signed into law today according to the inquisitor. I personally have not followed the bill to much until recently, with the summit coming to chicago and everyone in there mother are probably going to protest... So doing some research on the summit, this bill popped up and reading it more and more... I feel alot of protestors, next week here in Chicago will be arrested. The reason I feel alot of people will be arrested is because there are "boundaries" where you may and may not go in the summit. If your interested in the summit here is a link to that. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/05/04/security-plan-revealed-for-nato-summit-weekend/. Now back to the bill itself.

 

President Obama signed bill H.R. 347 (also known as the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011) into law on March 9th, amid numerous protests from the Occupy movement, as well as other agencies. HR 347 is a modification from Senate bill S. 1794, which restricted people from entering or blocking public areas that have been closed off by Secret Service while a person under their protection is passing through. The law also included major public events, such as the Inaguration and Presidential campaigns.

 

The new law, which passed the House with a vote of 399-3, extends the original law by adding more protected areas within Washington D.C, and removing the word “willfully,” from the paragraph stating that protesters can be prosecuted if they enter the area “willfully and knowingly.”

 

Representative Justin Amash, R-Michigan, explains this change by saying:

 

“ The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect its illegal.”

 

Occupy DC protesters are calling the modifications an infringement on their First Amendment rights, because of the areas of D.C. that have been added to the protected areas portion of the act. Approximately 80 protesters organized a silent march to symbolize their Freedom of Speech being taken away–some even taped their mouths closed to visually show their feelings about the bill. The part of the Bill of Rights they are referring to is the following:

 

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

 

Michael Mahaffey, Representative Tom Rooney’s (R-Fla. and the man responsible for introducing the bill to the House) communication director dismissed concerns that the bill violates civil liberties by saying, that the protests against H.R. 347 are, “a whole lot of kerfuffle over nothing. This (HR 347) doesn’t affect anyone’s right to protest anywhere at any time. Ever. ” He went on to say that, “… right now it’s not a federal violation to jump the fence and run across the White House lawn, this bill makes it a federal violation.”

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/206017/president-obama-signs-anti-protest-bill-h-r-347/#mDqe6TjFxxx5YStu.99'>http://www.inquisitr.com/206017/president-obama-signs-anti-protest-bill-h-r-347/#mDqe6TjFxxx5YStu.99

 

Source: http://www.inquisitr.com/206017/president-obama-signs-anti-protest-bill-h-r-347/

Share this post


Link to post

We are all humans, And ever seince the beginning of society we have uncontrollable lust for power.

And the only few who have corrected this lust have always beaten it. History repeats itself and the victors will be chosen all the same.

So I would not worrie about this. The flaw of being evil is that you will always crumble under your own weight.

The government may be corrupted, but our allies are not.

Share this post


Link to post

We are all humans, And ever seince the beginning of society we have uncontrollable lust for power.

And the only few who have corrected this lust have always beaten it. History repeats itself and the victors will be chosen all the same.

So I would not worrie about this. The flaw of being evil is that you will always crumble under your own weight.

The government may be corrupted, but our allies are not.

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×