What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
268 Comments
- actionscripted, on 12/03/2007, -7/+123Can we start rioting yet?
- LeviticusKrain, on 12/03/2007, -2/+108Who voted how in the House (in which the bill passed): http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h200 ...
How to contact your Senators for the upcoming Senate vote: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/ ... - UnclePow, on 12/03/2007, -5/+72"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear."
-Marcus Tullius Cicero, Roman Statesman, Philosopher and Orator 42 B.C.
http://www.amazon.com/Enemy-Within-America-Churche ... - mrpink.137, on 12/03/2007, -3/+58Kucinich was one of 6 that voted against it.
Votes: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h200 ... - odigity, on 12/03/2007, -19/+72Is everyone gonna get mad at me if I suggest voting for Ron Paul?
- ukfoole, on 12/03/2007, -4/+38Quote: we'll begin the process of replacing the president, and then the house and the senate
Didn't you yanks just change over the house and senate? *looks at bill* My goodness, they new regime of the Democrats were the ones to sponsor that tripe. Ouch, it must suck hard to have both parties hating the average citizen. - davidjsmitty, on 12/03/2007, -5/+38We'll have a peaceful revolution in the 2008 election in which we'll begin the process of replacing the president, and then the house and the senate. If that doesn't work, we'll have to see what happens, I know the revolution doesn't stop on election day.
- cracker42, on 12/03/2007, -3/+33Well, considering his voice of reason has long been ignored in the House (pre-Iraq war?) and judging by the number of "Aye" votes from the link above, I think he can do more for our country by campaigning hard to become President than being one of 6 other "Nay" votes.
- positron, on 12/03/2007, -2/+31Kind of like the House Committee on Unamerican Activities?
- hydrodev, on 12/03/2007, -1/+28probably, everyone on digg knows about Paul. If you want to support Paul, bring his name up to people who haven't heard of him or at least aren't bombarded by his name repeatedly.
- 1town, on 12/03/2007, -5/+31No. Wait until Bush declares martial law, that way you have a better case. (You'll still be in Guantanamo , with no habeus corpus, so it doesn't really matter)
- Waiting2awake, on 12/03/2007, -0/+25Worked well for Arar right? Seriously Cobbs, after all that has happened how can you continue to look at what has happened to your country with those rose glasses?
- Toshibi, on 12/03/2007, -1/+24Is it just me or did RATM leave right when we needed them the most?
- inactive, on 12/03/2007, -17/+40These bitches be killin' in the name of! We gon' take the power back and bring a funky radical bombtrack to these bulls on parade. ***** the radio! WAAAAKE UPPP! How you like that, sucka?
- Waiting2awake, on 12/03/2007, -1/+22There is proof- the best kind - history. Recent and ancient.
- UnclePow, on 12/03/2007, -2/+23I won't!
- frazw, on 12/03/2007, -1/+20899A is the important bit. That defines how they may reclassify you. Reclassification is the key point because it opens the door.
`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.'
If thinking (i.e. "adopting") NOT acting, but thinking a certain way becomes a crime then I'm afraid you are in so deep getting out is extremely difficult.
"extremist belief system" this is so poorly defined that it can be manipulated easily. In fact Bush loosely fits the description.
From 899B
`(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be utilized to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism.
"methods and processes" hmm wonder what these could be reclassification? removal of citizenship? who know but it allows you to avoid violating the constitution.
`(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security.
That means they can designate you a threat if they believe (or want to believe) you are, again small door opened.
`(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.'
"terrorist-related propaganda" keyword, "related." digg anyone?
It's all about loose definition, loopholes and so on. I am glad I don't live in America. Even if this bill doesn't explicitly grant power, it doesn't do anything to protect you. I wasn't even aware you had a "homegrown terrorism" problem.
I'll be extremely interested to see what happens at your election, if it comes to pass. - ShorXrorE, on 12/03/2007, -1/+20Yeah I've read the bill (it isnt long) and read the section that supposedly vindicates the bill according to people defending it in the comments.
Long story short: you people defending it are being really naive. Someone points out that it's main point is to target anti-globalization protestors and animal liberation activists. I agree. That is exactly why it is bad.
Besides the fact that anti-globalization and animal liberation protestors encompass millions of people (it seems to me you have a one sided view of who they are) what the bill is doing is criminalizing the laws they break TWICE over and also categorizing destruction of property on par with the taking of human life. That right there should prove inherently that the bill is wrong regardless of whether it's just going to start a committee or put the bill in action.
What the bill effectively does is say anyone who believes in something extreme (example: animal rights activist) and follows through on that extreme belief (for example: stopping illegal torture of animals by breaking a door down and taking the animals) will now be considered a terrorist because they 1) broke a door and the evidence to support this will be 2) their extreme ideology. So in effect, what would previously have been probably a no jail time crime or max a few months (assuming no very long prior record, which does occur occasionally) this person could now most likely serve several years in jail because they are breaking what could be a new law that classifies them as terrorists.
That's the problem in a nutshell and exactly why the law is bad. Property is not as important as human life. Destruction of property can be (and isn't always) a valuable part of activism and protest. Are we going to label someone who burns a flag a terrorist for destroying property? What about someone who accidentally breaks something trying to run from police at a protest? Lots of things happen, the vast majority of which are never reported on the news, that can now be classified as terrorism if that bill were ever put into affect. Even if you disagree with the specific acts you SHOULD agree that it doesn't make people terrorists and they shouldn't be charged as such. - OwdenBowden, on 12/03/2007, -1/+20Thanks for the links. This is a BAD BILL. The problem is 99.999% of out "representatives" all voted YES to a bill which reverses everything that our Founding Fathers wanted and for all of the Men and Women in our Arm Forces have fought and died for. To be frank - this bill is an act of TREASON and anyone who has created, voted for, signed Should be hung from the Neck until Dead.
I have posted the entire bill below. It is a rather large posting but so important to have. - Asrrin29, on 12/03/2007, -0/+18Um, did the article NOT point out almost every dictatorship in history, big and small, and give lists and lists of Acts and Resolutions passed, names of people, organizations, and dictators? how much more proof to do you need?
- proseandpromise, on 12/03/2007, -1/+18I guess it's a good thing England hadn't passed this bill before the Revolution? All those terrorists (Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Benjamin...) would have been in some hot water.
- synthpop, on 12/03/2007, -2/+19ok so you've got you committee over here, you got your secret Halliburton detention centers over there. it just takes a quick stroke of a pen to connect the two. baby steps, people
- kazersoza, on 12/03/2007, -1/+17Even if it's just a committee.. its more unneeded bureaucratic BS. Also, looks like a loaded gun ready to shoot down our freedom. May not go off if it passes, however its one more step to the firing squad.
- holzp, on 12/03/2007, -1/+17Because nothing says Raging Against the Machine like a record deal with Sony.
- sugarkang, on 12/03/2007, -2/+18too busy drinking tanqueray. haha, i just realized that he can't even spell his own name.
- grenden, on 12/03/2007, -1/+17Micahmn, it is true that Naomi Wolf did not mention HR 1955 in her article--but neither did Bangor, in his comment. You were the one to bring it up. Oh and by the way, did you notice when the article was posted? Maybe you should have read it more closely before attacking Bangor. April 24, 2007--so around 7 months ago. Granted, HR 1955 was introduced April 19, but it wasn't passed by the House until October 24. But hey, what do I know? I only "researched" for this comment for 2 minutes. More than you though, it appears.
- davidjsmitty, on 12/03/2007, -1/+17quote 'You are also calling for the defeat of virtually every Member of Congress. I suggest you get campaigning and soon!'
I'm calling for the defeat of virtually every member of Congress. I've already started campaigning. It doesn't take much to help someone see how our current legislators have tread on our Constitution. We want our lives, liberties, and pursuit of happiness back. - davidjsmitty, on 12/03/2007, -1/+16I did read the bill. I hate it. I also read the PATRIOT act before it was voted on - I also hated it.
- AxelDunor, on 12/03/2007, -1/+16Naomi Wolf brilliantly described the fascisation currently experienced by the US society.
It's difficult to accept because things change very progressively, days after days, months after months. Meanwhile our world seems the same, the cars are driving in the road, the kids are playing in the garden.
It's painful to accept because we are brainwashed everyday by the mass medias who keep repeating the same propaganda : US is the greatest democraty, our government is potecting freedom, the economic growth is never ending, US citizen are happier and happier, life conditions keep improving, those new laws are passed to defend your liberties,...
Sadly the objective reality is far different from the rosy picture proposed by the mainstream medias.
People of America, wake up, soon it will be too late. - Pssdoff, on 12/03/2007, -0/+15There are many detailed cases in her book. http://www.amazon.com/End-America-Letter-Warning-P ...
- debutstudios, on 12/03/2007, -14/+28Ron Paul is the solution! Vote Ron Paul 2008
- supermanred, on 12/03/2007, -1/+15Read some of Hitler's original documents that were passed into law, they werent too scary either at the time. Restore your constitution and stop making excuses for your ***** up government.
- davidjsmitty, on 12/03/2007, -2/+15Damn it, unjust violence is illegal. It's always been illegal. Even before Bush. We don't need another bill to study it. Un-needed legislation.
- davidjsmitty, on 12/03/2007, -2/+14We already have laws against unjust violence. Why do we need another one?
- hydrodev, on 12/03/2007, -2/+14what a chicken *****
- ukfoole, on 12/03/2007, -9/+21I guess the old saying of `you get what you pay for` fits this one to a T. You elect a gaggle of Democrats, and them blokes off and toss your rights into the crapper.
Lovely how the primary sponsor who brought this up was a Democrat and most of the co-sponsors are as well. Then they give it a near unanimous vote. That is very balls to the wall. Mayhap you'd best be voting for one of those third parties this time around. - dinostabOMG, on 12/03/2007, -0/+12Here is the letter I wrote to my senators, in case anyone wants to use it as a jumping-off point. I ask that you don't send it exactly like this as it's more effective to have many voices expressing concern.
Dear Senator,
I must ask you to OPPOSE the Senate counterpart of H.R. 1955. This bill includes vague language that would effectively criminalize dissenting political voices and expand federal intrusion into the private lives of ordinary citizens.
Particularly ironic is its provision that "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, and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents" whereas the bill promises to enable preemptive surveillance of Americans on flimsy grounds of suspicion.
While it insists that "individuals should not be targeted based SOLELY on race, ethnicity, or religion," (emphasis mine) it does provide that this may be a factor.
All of these concerns are worrying to me and my family and friends, and so I must reiterate that I ask you to OPPOSE this bill to the fullest extent possible.
Thank you, - ricer333, on 12/03/2007, -1/+12Funny thing is... It's too early to say that. Some day in the future maybe historians will look back at some of these events and say "wow, how did the people of that time not know what was going on?". Similar to how our youth has views of the Holocast and WWII. Hitler was a very motivational speaker and played on the needs of the people blaming the Jews and other minorities for their problems. Sound familiar? Maybe... maybe not. Hindsight is always 20/20... unfortunetely we are not far enough into the future to see what is going on clearly enough right now.
- inactive, on 12/03/2007, -1/+12Im not really sure that Sony is the one trying to enslave America.
- mclewell, on 12/03/2007, -1/+12your are a complete and utter idiot. HR 1955 basically links sedition to terrorism.
- pilgrim3970, on 12/03/2007, -4/+15"Is everyone gonna get mad at me if I suggest voting for Ron Paul?"
As much as I like what Ron Paul is about, this is like trying to empty the ocean with a tea spoon. Let's say RP does become president, great. However, there will still be the incompetents in the house and senate that will be the bottle neck to any real change. We need to start voting out INDIVIDUALS who are doing the job rather than playing this game of swapping for either side of the same coin as was done with the last "vote for change"
This being said, while I do think that there are some disturbing trends, I also think that the writer of this article is indeed stretching things a bit and loses major cred with me trying to lay this completely at the republican's or GW's feet - what have the Dems on capital hill been doing all this time???? The fact is both sides are sending this country into a tail spin - time to start voting the person rather than the party - davidjsmitty, on 12/03/2007, -2/+13Quote: it must suck hard to have both parties hating the average citizen Yes, it sucks. Anybody that's paying attention knows it sucks.
Peaceful social change takes time. We're on it. We appreciate support from other countries, we need it. - directrix13, on 12/03/2007, -3/+14I forgot how we have 100,000 representatives now. ;-)
- booyaman1, on 12/03/2007, -0/+11Actually, that's kind of the whole point of her thesis - that these 10 steps have been used time and time again in various nations throughout history. You would have to read her whole book to get all the cited references that back up this claim, but I think she's pretty spot on (and that's coming from someone who has taken issue with previous writings of Wolf's).
- jspegele, on 12/03/2007, -3/+13Quit being a diggtard. You know what he meant.
- megadan76, on 12/03/2007, -0/+10Can you guys start using all those guns you claim are for protecting you from the government soon, please?
- kazersoza, on 12/03/2007, -1/+11Even if it's just a committee.. its more unneeded bureaucratic BS. Also, looks like a loaded gun ready to shoot down our freedom. May not go off if it passes, however its one more step to the firing squad.
- TLAKABM, on 12/03/2007, -1/+10The US Democratic is a right-wing, corporate-interest party just like the republican that only gives the illusion of diversity in politics.
The reality is the the general public is left of the democrats, and left of what the media conveys as the popular opinion.
For example, the majority of US citizens support the idea of national medicare system (usually called 'socialist medicine' to make people think it's an extremist view), but there's no political support for it, and the people who support it think they're alone when they're not.
The media obfuscates popular opinion, presenting right wing views as the norm and left wing views as extremist. The reason is that is if people knew how far political opinion was from popular opinion there'd be an uproar, but people don't know what popular opinion is so they think they're alone and they don't get angry or organised
Then they do several things to enforce this further. They claim the media has a left-wing bias, so if people think they're left of the media they must be extremist and in the minority. The also call the Democrats left-wing liberals, and again, if you're left of them you must be extremist.
Yes, there are people who agree with the status quo, but they're right wing. The left-wing gets little representation, and when it does it gets labeled as extreme.
Everyone knows corporate-interests dominate politics and the media, and eveyone knows the elections are a public relations farce. - Pokeyzilla, on 12/03/2007, -0/+9Herostratus... here's the quote you were looking for (a personal favorite).
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author) - TLAKABM, on 12/03/2007, -2/+11Yes, the media is not liberal, they only want you to think that.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 268 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is