|
28 Nov 07 - 01:41 PM (#2204022) Subject: US law designed to arrest YOU From: Donuel Few people here would be excempt from this proposed law that would render them subject to arrest for what they have written on mudcat. Full PDF text if the bill: http://tinyurl.com/3a3y2z http://tinyurl.com/3a3y2z If this bill is passed, and becomes law, your words and actions could be considered terrorism. S 1959 EVISCERATES FREE SPEECH, and empowers the government to declare ANYTHING they deem an "extremist belief system" to instantly make you a 'terrorist' and resulting in stripping of US citizenship, torture, and/or execution, with no habeas corpus rights, no ability to challenge even in the US Supreme Court. Homeland Security troops will have all the authority of Hitler's SS Time is running out as the closure of the once open American society closes in the fist of neo con neo fascist power grabs. I can hear FOX already "Of course only those who are against us would be subject to this law." but then again they aren't reporting on this bill. I hope it doesn't pass. |
|
28 Nov 07 - 01:45 PM (#2204025) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: jeffp Commentary at http://www.slate.com/id/2178646/ |
|
28 Nov 07 - 01:52 PM (#2204033) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: Peace So when we brought this up a few years back few seemed interested. Why would today be any different? |
|
28 Nov 07 - 01:54 PM (#2204036) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: Folkiedave "George III was right - Americans are not fit to govern themselves". First said by an American post grad. studying politics at Sheffield University when Reagan was elected. |
|
28 Nov 07 - 01:59 PM (#2204040) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: GUEST,Jim Dixon Where in that bill does it say anything about arresting people? I must have missed that part. |
|
28 Nov 07 - 02:08 PM (#2204046) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: artbrooks This is a House Bill (#1955), recently referred to the Senate, to establish a commission to study terrorism. One thing it says is: The Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States citizens or lawful permanent residents. It does not give Homeland Security or anyone else any arrest powers of any kind. |
|
28 Nov 07 - 02:52 PM (#2204078) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: Barry Finn Do we have any onstitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties left? Barry |
|
28 Nov 07 - 02:55 PM (#2204083) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: Mrs.Duck No Barry, them in charge have taken all the liberties. |
|
28 Nov 07 - 02:59 PM (#2204090) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: Amos We do have some. The Bill provides for a Commission to study the roots of self-radicalization and what it rather stupidly terms "Home Grown Terrorism". The danger is not that it provides for any action or penalty against speech per se, but that it establishes a stupid category with which to label speech, much as "Communist!" was used to label a whole spectrum of liberal notions back int he Fifties during Macarthy's reign of terror. A |
|
28 Nov 07 - 02:59 PM (#2204091) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: frogprince The whole stated purpose of the bill is to seek ways to head off violence and intimidation by the threat of violence. For the first few paragraphs, I was thinking that there was nothing here for any decent, honest person to fear. But as I read on: 1. How do you define or identify "Individuals prone to violent radicalization"? 2. Such "individuals should not be targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion". That "solely", which is supposed to sound like some kind of assurance of fairness, is potentially LOADED . 3. "shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States citizens or lawful permanent residents"; that either assumes that lawful, temporary residents have never had any rights, that their rights are not inviolate, or both. And true, the bill does not give anyone the power to arrest anyone; it only gives them the framework to recommend giving someone the power to do whatever they deem necessary to "prevent violent radicalization" by targeting "individuals prone to violent radicalization". Show me a complete definition of that last quoted phrase that doesn't put any outspoken radical on at least the fringe of danger, and I will breath easier. |
|
28 Nov 07 - 03:44 PM (#2204129) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: JohnInKansas It's also quite reassuring that an audit committee within the committee formed to implement this will make sure that our rights are protected. I can see it being quite handy to control a few "radical hatemongers," such as the Phelps gang; but it's countered by Sen Brownback's proposed Constitutional Ammendment (currently sidelined, temporarily(?)) S520 "(a) Amendment to Title 28- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: `Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable `Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'." ... making any member of the "church" - or of the Taliban - untouchable if (s)he can get an appointment as dog-catcher. Neither bill appears, incidentally, in the Senate Listing of Active Legislation. Although sometimes things sneak through without being well published, that's mostly an Administration function recently. John |
|
28 Nov 07 - 04:01 PM (#2204144) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: MMario John - as you have qouted it that section only makes a public official exempt from a US Supreme Court action; not from local or state actions, and exempt from US Supreme Court action only if the action is based on the agent/official's religious views or lack thereof. |
|
28 Nov 07 - 05:31 PM (#2204222) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: JohnInKansas MMario - So if I burn a cross on your front lawn, and the police chief says it was "god's will" I can't be prosecuted? And if the police refuse to arrest someone who beats up an "illegal immigrant" because "god doesn't want them here," and the state court says "that's okay, 'cause they're illegal" there's no appeal to SCOTUS? The problem is that the states, and state courts, have frequently accepted things found by the SCOTUS to be "unconstitutional" and/or otherwise "not valid law." If there is to be one "final authority" then the authority must lie in the same place for all matters. The proposed amendment effectively says that the state legislature (and/or courts) can say that anything - such as mandatory public school prayer to "the right God" - already ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS - can be declared invalid at lower level and the Supreme Court is prohibited even from hearings on it. Language is included that overturns all prior decisions of the Supreme Court "not based on common law prior to the Constitution." That includes a whole lot of existing law - but not "the Bible" of course. The proposed amendment also provides for the removal of any member of the judiciary who "questions anything done in the name of religion," and allows any agent of any public authority" to cite "God's law" as "supreme and superceding all man-made law" - at least Brownback has said so. On the original subject: The link provided by Donuel in the opening post is to S.1959, introduced in the Senate by Maine Repuplican Senator Sarah Collins in August 2007. The link to "comment," by jeffp in the second post, is to H.R.1955, introduced in the House by California Democratic Representative Jane Harman. Since the House bill was introduced several months prior (March 2007) to the separate Senate bill (August 2007), the Senate version appears to be a "political knee-jerk," as normal procedure would be for the Senate to consider the House bill, under its House Name/Designation, after passage by the House. H.R.1955 passed the House vote in October 2007. There are some small(?) but significant differences between the two (literacy of the respective authors possibly being one?) and discussion should be careful to be sure that we're all talking about the same piece of Neither bill appears - that I can find - in the Active Bills List for the Senate. Since the House bill proposed an amendment to the Homeland Security Act, any "consideration" dealing with that act could sneak in the changes indicated without separate consideration of the bill as passed by the House, of course. John |
|
28 Nov 07 - 07:21 PM (#2204294) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: The Fooles Troupe So it appears that the important lessons have been learnt since the 1930s - be more damn subtle about it? :-) |
|
28 Nov 07 - 11:33 PM (#2204418) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: frogprince And with that wording about the rights of "permanent legal residents", visitors and legal temporaries are on thin ice, but any totally peaceful poor schmuck, guilty only of being illegal, who gets accused of saying one inflammatory word, will be extremely lucky if he gets deported instead of being incarcerated, incommunicado. As if that hasn't been pretty much the case already. |
|
29 Nov 07 - 11:12 AM (#2204708) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: Donuel Thanks John your clarity of the bill's evolution and true intent to by pass federal constitutional guarantees by the states is eye opening. This adminsistration hoped to pack the courts with Gonzales like loyalists but short of that. continues to pursue a strangulation of the courts. While the bill seems inactive there are numerous real examples of secret ear marking of a seemingly benign legiislativve law and the "amendment stuckj into the middle at 4 AM before a morning vote. In other words this 1955 POS could still become law by stealth. |
|
29 Nov 07 - 03:13 PM (#2204924) Subject: RE: BS: New law designed to arrest YOU From: Backwoodsman "and resulting in stripping of US citizenship" Not all bad news then? |