hr1955 is now S-1959 full text here

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by Tango3, Nov 20, 2007.

  1. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

  2. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    8 ‘‘(c) AUDITING MECHANISM.—The Civil Rights and
    9 Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Se10
    curity shall develop and implement an auditing mechanism
    11 to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not vio12
    late the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties
    13 of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, and shall include
    14 the results of audits under such mechanism in its annual
    15 report to Congress required under section 705.’’.

    I wonder if these groups include monkeys.
  3. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    Here is what I sent my Senator;

    S 1959

    Amendment I

    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.

    This bill is as anti-Constitution as the patriot act!!!!! The Federal Government has taken more power than the Constitution allows, they do not need more they need LESS!!!! A yes vote for this will ensure that I do anything I can to get you voted out!!!!!!!!

    She never answers my e-mails so I do look for her to answer this one but I tried. Likely I'll be first on her list to use this bill against when she votes for it though.

  4. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    Mind if I use that???its direct, factual,
    probably radicalizing, but we've already breached that barrier this week...
  5. Evenglischatiest

    Evenglischatiest Monkey+++

    I'm missing something here.

    Let's say, hypothetically, a group of people were considering revolting, because they believe the government has far overstepped it's legitimate authority. Will they now lay down their arms, because a new law gives the government still more power? Will the arrest (more likely worse) of those people, who've yet to commit an actual crime, reassure the rest of the "domestic terrorists" that the government isn't overstepping it's bounds?
  6. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    Please do. [winkthumb] Who knows maybe we can be cell mates.[LMAO]

  7. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    Agreed, textbook communist guerilla operations theory. :shock:
    Insurgeants appear from within the general public, want public support, then they outrightly strike the gov. The gov brings down harsh new laws and starts to clamp down on the populace, The public starts to side with the insurgeants; the terrorist strike again, the gov is forced to use the only advantage it has: massive unfocused force on the public at large; and still more side with the guerillas. It is a downward one way spiral...[coffee2](cuba/vietnam)
    "terrorists" have hitthe US us with a particularly devastating methodology: We citizens are between a rock (terrorists) and a hardplace( crushing government)We citizens have a real problem.:shock:OSB

    P.S.This thanksgiving I' m thankful the administration is trying to get this "terrorist thing" under control before it spirals into total tyranny...[patr]
  8. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

  9. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Methinks it might be one hellish large cell, there are more than the two of you thinking like that.
  10. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    Admittedly I am the first to point out percieved wrongs and jump aboard a moving train;but All fever aside;, does anyone take this bill at face value ?
    "Establishing a comittee to study "radicalization"?Granted if your reading comprehension exceeds the 8th grade level the implications for free thought and speech are abhorrent. Watching some of the frenzied videos on google repeating the "thought crime bill" mantra; one persons'video explained "ideology based violence" as:" ideas that undermine or hurt other was at this point I stopped.left a comment explaining ideology based violence meant "violent acts based on an ideology "I took a deep breath and re-read some more. I'm not saying this bill is not dangerous and the whole idea is within the bounds of the constitution, but it is getting "hyped" pretty hard by some folks who don't seem to comprehend english ...(I trust the monkeys to throw the bs flag when something is too far out and I'm caught up in the fervor)...
  11. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder


    I understand and agree with what your saying, but (you knew there was going to be a but in here) we are dealing with .gov here. Seeing how they misinterpit the Consitution can you just imagen how they will read this???

  12. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    OGM I'm trying to sift the wheat from the chaff. I can get real worked up on Alex Jones' stuff even though I don't believe in everything he says through and through. I don't trust this gov...any more than you do:

    Watched a piece the other on CNN about a vet who lost his right arm( below the elbow)in an IED attack and his VA disability paperwork disallowed the shrapnell in his body as "not service connected"(perhaps he was a welder and had a lot of slag or grindings under his skin???), .To top it off the signature on the second page had been cut out with pair of scissors, his wife stated "that was how they received the document"(??)(bs?).

    I don't expect them to come right out and say" individual ownership of firearms has been repealed as of march 31 2008", or""dissent is now illegal".So we have to look behind the words at the intentions( but that can be a slippery paranoid delusional slope).



    THE MINISTRY OF LOVE IS DOUBLEPLUSGOOD COMRADE and looking out for our safety.
  13. monkeyman

    monkeyman Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Dibs on a top bunk!

    A law can not be judged based on how the best of government would use it but must be judged upon how the worst of governments COULD use it. We have an administration at the moment that is FAR from the best and is creating this law to easily give them what leeway they need to comfortably and 'legally' do what they want. It must then be judged based on how much further it could realisticly be stretched by the worst of administratins (as in even worse than the one we have if imaginable). The very primise of the bill is far beyond violateing peoples rights based purely on its purpose, stoping people from spreading ideas because they make the gove look bad and might if spread enouph force the gov to correct its self and comply with the will of the people and the constitution or be forced to deal with the people. The right to do these things is implicitly guaranteed by the constitution and so ANY enforcement of this 'law' would be a crime because it cannot if fact ever be a true law.
  14. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    brokor I see you're around...what's your take ?bad as it looks?

  15. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

  16. hindsightis2020

    hindsightis2020 Monkey+++

    ‘‘(8) Any measure taken to prevent violent​
    22 ​
    radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologi
    23 cally based violence and homegrown terrorism in the

    24 ​
    United States should not violate the constitutional
    1 rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States

    2 citizens and lawful permanent residents.

    I just read the hr. Not word for word but this stood out. I though the word play was kinda funny. Instead of saying will not is says should not.

  17. SeptemberMage

    SeptemberMage LaMOE Monkey

    This Bill shouldn't scare anyone. It should piss you off though.
    All this Bill does is create a worthless commission which will be disbanded after 18 months. All they are authorized to do is make suggestions. This bill is just another shamefully obvious way of throwing "Homeland security" money to a bunch of cronies.
    The best, and worst, thing you can say about this useless bill, is that it is bipartisan in that it splits the useless postiions right down the middle for both parties to take advantage of.
    You can bet that we'll never hear who gets all the positions created by this commission "as may be necessary to enable the Commission to carry out its functions, without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code... ...relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates"

    Basically this bill shouldn't scare you, it should piss you off.
  18. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    it does inject a little intimidation into the mix ...
    I'd be happier if no one was tasked to study my internet "communications".
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary