If there is Martial Law question?

[CountryMe]

I hope I heard this wrong or just misunderstood but if Martial
Law is declared before the election then it would stop the
election from taking place and whoever is in power which in
this case is Bush, would be dictator for 8 years???????

Someone tell me......It ain't so!!!!

[nate895]

They'd be virtual dictator for the duration of the "emergency."

[awake]

10 yr depression... 10 more years.

[2young2vote]

I don't think he would be dictator. Hmm..300,000,000 pissed, armed Americans VS the Army...that would make a good book and movie. They would probably appoint someone else as president.

[nate895]

I don't think he would be dictator. Hmm..300,000,000 pissed, armed Americans VS the Army...that would make a good book and movie. They would probably appoint someone else as president.

And at least half the Army would be on the people's side.

[CountryMe]

I don't know, I mean it seems at least a third of the people are totally
asleep, another third starting to wake up but not quite there yet, and
with Congress and the media convincing so many people everything they
say is truth until would there really be enough uprising??? Something to think
about. I know it's starting to get scary to me.

Bush and Congress would probably convince everyone it is in their
best interest to have the guns removed, etc.

[nate895]

I don't know, I mean it seems at least a third of the people are totally
asleep, another third starting to wake up but not quite there yet, and
with Congress and the media convincing so many people everything they
say is truth until would there really be enough uprising??? Something to think
about. I know it's starting to get scary to me.

Bush and Congress would probably convince everyone it is in their
best interest to have the guns removed, etc.

In those situations, all it takes is a couple of crazies and then the whole country is on fire. The colonies weren't going to rebel until a few crazy Minutemen in Lexington, and a few more in Concord, stood up to the British Army. Since I'm not that crazy, I don't know who'd do it.

[CountryMe]

And at least half the Army would be on the people's side.

The following is what I heard in a video with the link at the end of the quote!

When a survey was given to Marines at 29 Palms Base (in Southern California)
to Army Special Operations Recruits and the survey asked troops if they would swear to the following code "45. I would swear to the following code: I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain world peace and every nations way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense." This survey also asked
if these US Military men would fire upon US Citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of fire arms banned by the US Government.

So, folks this pretty much shows what can happen and everyone needs to be aware of all this stuff. I really would love to know what Ron Paul would say about this?

This video points out our Government does not want to get this information out
as this manual says to destroy it by any means to prevent its dissimulation!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNKMlhj4ARY

[TruthAtLast]

Our army isn't that big is it? It can't be more than a half a million troops. (purely hypothetical) what if we all just joined the armed forces? haha

200-300 thousand Ron Paul supporters join the army, take it over and take back our country. I know it is far fetched but after the crap we've seen this election, sometimes I think that would be easier than defeating the MSM and the two party political system.

[misericordia]

^^^^ best idea yet.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Yeah, I don't think Bush would be the public face of Martial Law. They would have some totally new puppet, either Obama or Palin or maybe even a corrupted General who goes along with it. Some bankers and powerful interests allegedly wanted to put General Smedly Butler in power in the 1930s as a public face for outright dictatorship, but Butler was against the idea after approached and blew their cover, so the coup never came.

[heavenlyboy34]

Our army isn't that big is it? It can't be more than a half a million troops. (purely hypothetical) what if we all just joined the armed forces? haha

200-300 thousand Ron Paul supporters join the army, take it over and take back our country. I know it is far fetched but after the crap we've seen this election, sometimes I think that would be easier than defeating the MSM and the two party political system.

It would take many years to infiltrate the heirarchy. Plus, you would have to carry out aggressive policies that you don't agree with. :(:mad:

[pepperpete1]

The following is what I heard in a video with the link at the end of the quote!

When a survey was given to Marines at 29 Palms Base (in Southern California)
to Army Special Operations Recruits and the survey asked troops if they would swear to the following code "45. I would swear to the following code: I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain world peace and every nations way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense." This survey also asked
if these US Military men would fire upon US Citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of fire arms banned by the US Government.

So, folks this pretty much shows what can happen and everyone needs to be aware of all this stuff. I really would love to know what Ron Paul would say about this?

This video points out our Government does not want to get this information out
as this manual says to destroy it by any means to prevent its dissimulation!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNKMlhj4ARY


He did not serve in the special forces but was given that survey. This was before the war in Iraq. His was response to would you shoot a family member, friend, or any civilian for civil disobedience, was , no. Did that video (sorry I have dial up and it would take 2 hours to down load) say what the results of the survey were. If my memory is correct, 80% of the Marines said "no".

[hillbilly123069]

Yup!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/04/ED5OUPQJ7.DTL

[CountryMe]

my understanding and I could be wrong but the code that they had to swear to states they "would fire upon US Citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of fire arms banned by the US Government,"

[CountryMe]

Yup!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/04/ED5OUPQJ7.DTL


Oh my goodness part of this reads

"The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations, or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike."

The part of the above that reads "or who speaks out against the government's policies."

So according to that we could not even say we are against the income tax, against the war, or anything such as that. Man.

And another part of the article:

"A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000 "terror suspects" with the number increasing by 20,000 per month."

According to that our freedom of speech is gone! And of course no one can get together and plan attacks or be violent, things like that but that is not everything that the above is saying.

[Vote Waterman 2028]

And at least half the Army would be on the people's side.

Not if they were of the persuasion that it was best for the country and people as a whole. My dad is in the military and ive been around armed forces all my life. Believe me, if they think its for the good of the country they are going to do it. they might even go russian style and shoot any traitor soldiers who try to flee from the battle.

[CountryMe]

I asked my husband, a veteran, if he had been told he had to take that oath about killing american citizens would he, and of course he said, "No" and then went on to say he knew that would probably mean court martial.

Ok people, we really need to spread all this stuff NOW while we still can because if Martial Law is declared that is when we no longer will have our freedom of speech??? Or is it already gone according to The Military Commissions Act of 2006?????

[CountryMe]

Oh my goodness part of this reads

"The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations, or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike."

The part of the above that reads "or who speaks out against the government's policies."

So according to that we could not even say we are against the income tax, against the war, or anything such as that. Man.

And another part of the article:

"A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000 "terror suspects" with the number increasing by 20,000 per month."

According to that our freedom of speech is gone! And of course no one can get together and plan attacks or be violent, things like that but that is not everything that the above is saying.



I was hoping some of you would know if the above in this article means as of The Military Commissions Act of 2006, does it mean we have already lost our freedom of speech? Or does it mean only if Martial Law is declared then we could no longer speak out against government policies, or have peaceful demonstrations, etc. ???

[freelance]

I was hoping some of you would know if the above in this article means as of The Military Commissions Act of 2006, does it mean we have already lost our freedom of speech? Or does it mean only if Martial Law is declared then we could no longer speak out against government policies, or have peaceful demonstrations, etc. ???

It's intentionally left to the imagination, just like most of the new laws. IOW, it means whatever they want it to mean in any given situation.

[RonPaulCentral]

My take on martial law:

A huge portion of our military has been dedicated to Iraq / AG for a while now and all in all we cant (won't) leave because, well, we have not been able to win.

Here in the U.S. people are on their home turf. We also have a HUGE country. Even if *EVERY* U.S. Military member was used and the entire active civilian law enforcement arm there are no where near the amount of people to enforce martial law against an unwilling population.

A few things to consider:

(1) As sheople as the people are in the U.S. they still believe in the "we are a free country" concept. They would NOT accept martial law easily.

(2) We have a HEAVILY armed citizen base.

(3) There are some people that are REALLY REALLY armed... like multiple weapons and 100's thousands of rounds... :rolleyes:

(4) To bring home 100% of the military would leave a huge instant void around the world which would case everything to break out into war. Russia would take Europe, China would run through Asia and the Middle East (entire thing) would flatten Israel

(5) U.S. Cities would be looted and uncontrollable. Every hood and their friend would be out raping, pillaging and having a good ol' time. Many cities would be burning.

(6) People would probably set wide spread forest fires to further disrupt civil services.

(7) The U.S. Military CAN NOT operate in the U.S. without SERIOUS PROBLEMS if the *CIVILIAN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK* (Ie; trucking and logistics) were not running. Half of the personnel would need to be used for logistics.

This is something that will not go down easily. Most everyone I know (and I know a lot of people) would simply not accept this as we have already discussed it. This includes people that are cops (active and retired), Doctors, Lawyers, Construction Crew, A/C, Hotel, Real Estate, Gun Instruction, Computer Engineering, etc... they come from all walks of life and are all about fed up with everything. The general opinion is that they WOULD NOT give up their protection under any circumstances. Now agreed, I am sure there are a few that when actually faced with combat they might opt to just give up and save their lives (at least for the moment) but then there are many that simply would not under any circumstances.

Last night I was at the bar and ended up talking to someone I had never seen in there before. They were listening to a conversation with a friend of mine. We were discussing how we think it is going to take a VERY long time for recovery (like 10+ years) and were discussing long term barter options and food storage, etc. Anyhow this woman ended up joining into the conversation and she went on about how the fed govt is screwing people and that basic govt systems were looking to be in bad shape on the local/State levels. She shared that her and her husband had recently purchased a 1+ year supply of storage food. They also told me about going to a place called FrontSight (I know it well I highly recommend it http://frontsight.com) in Nevada to receive DEFENSE TRAINING! Anyhow, the amazing part of this was when we found out what she does for a living. She works for NASA as an engineer. LOL Just after talking with her it was obvious to me that her and her husband would not go "quietly into the night" if it came down to it.

This mentality is starting to take root EVERYWHERE.

[CountryMe]

I heard the FBI put out a document about 8 years back that said people who make frequent references to the constitution could be terrorists!!

Is that true???? IF SO THAT EXPLAINS EXACTLY HOW THEY ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE AWAY MANY OF OUR FREEDOMS!! Stop peaceful demonstrations, can't voice our opposition to war or taxes, nothing that our government is for. I understand acts of violence or trying to organize that is wrong but to be againt these government policies such as taxes, is not being a terrorist.

Oh man the more I am learning ever since this Bailout Bill started the more I want to turn off the news, and turn off the internet, but the part of me that wants to know more, wants to know if it's true keeps me on the internet but not sure about the national news anymore!

[RonPaulCentral]

I heard the FBI put out a document about 8 years back that said people who make frequent references to the constitution could be terrorists!!

Is that true???? IF SO THAT EXPLAINS EXACTLY HOW THEY ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE AWAY MANY OF OUR FREEDOMS!! Stop peaceful demonstrations, can't voice our opposition to war or taxes, nothing that our government is for. I understand acts of violence or trying to organize that is wrong but to be againt these government policies such as taxes, is not being a terrorist.

Oh man the more I am learning ever since this Bailout Bill started the more I want to turn off the news, and turn off the internet, but the part of me that wants to know more, wants to know if it's true keeps me on the internet but not sure about the national news anymore!

Study history and you will have all the answers you seek.

[acptulsa]

The battle is for the hearts and minds of the U.S. citizen. As long as they can keep a majority on board, they can do anything.

Read It Can't Happen Here by Sinclair Lewis.

[CountryMe]

Has there been any major news coverage about the Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), And Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51) SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE PART "A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on."

It seems like this would had been on every news channel from CNN to especially our dear (not) friends at Fox News that is so concerned with our morals and our freedoms making everything so fair and balanced!?????

[politicsNproverbs]

...Bush, would be dictator for 8 years???????
Someone tell me......It ain't so!!!!

Back in June 2005 some idiots in Congress tried to get a bill out that would repeal the 22nd Amendment (ie, remove the 2-term limit for the president). We thought back then, Oh No, Bush wants to be Prez/Dictator for LIFE!

FWIW, that bill was:


HJ 24 IH
109th CONGRESS
1st Session

H. J. RES. 24
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States
to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 17, 2005

Mr. HOYER (for himself, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SABO, and Mr. PALLONE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
---------------

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

Article --

'The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed.'.

------------------------------

The 22nd amendment as reprinted on the FindLaw website reads as follows.

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2. This Article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

Annotations
Limitation of Presidential Terms

''By reason of the lack of a positive expression upon the subject of the tenure of the office of President, and by reason of a well-defined custom which has risen in the past that no President should have more than two terms in that office, much discussion has resulted upon this subject. Hence it is the purpose of this . . . [proposal] . . . to submit this question to the people so they, by and through the recognized processes, may express their views upon this question, and if they shall so elect, they may . . . thereby set at rest this problem.''

Just now I tried to find it at that Thomas.gov website to make sure it was a long-gone DEAD issue, but this is the result I got... go figure, after three-plus years?

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas


The text of H. J. RES. 24 has not yet been received from GPO

Bills are generally sent to the Library of Congress from the Government Printing Office a day or two after they are introduced on the floor of the House or Senate. Delays can occur when there are a large number of bills to prepare or when a very large bill has to be printed.

I wish they were that far behind for the Bailout bill! :rolleyes:

Here is the search page for the 109th Congress, maybe I did it wrong:

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c109query.html

Anyway, my point is and to reply to your exclamation, we felt then, and still do now, that Bush probably would like to keep his office much much longer... Afterall, he's the "Decider" and says things would be "so much easier if he were the Dictator."

[CountryMe]

Back in June 2005 some idiots in Congress tried to get a bill out that would repeal the 22nd Amendment (ie, remove the 2-term limit for the president). We thought back then, Oh No, Bush wants to be Prez/Dictator for LIFE!

FWIW, that bill was:



Just now I tried to find it at that Thomas.gov website to make sure it was a long-gone DEAD issue, but this is the result I got... go figure, after three-plus years?

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas



I wish they were that far behind for the Bailout bill! :rolleyes:

Here is the search page for the 109th Congress, maybe I did it wrong:

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c109query.html

Anyway, my point is and to reply to your exclamation, we felt then, and still do now, that Bush probably would like to keep his office much much longer... Afterall, he's the "Decider" and says things would be "so much easier if he were the Dictator."

THANKS for posting this. You know when Bush was first elected or appointed or whatever you want to call it I had a funny feeling about him and I did not know anything about him! I am a Republican, too, and did not vote for Gore so that wasn't it. That was before I started gradually waking up to things to where I am today! I still don't know as much as I need to know but at least I am trying to learn as much as my old brain will hold lol.

[politicsNproverbs]

You're welcome, CountryMe! And I know what you mean about filling up the "old brain," lol.

Earlier you mentioned the new FBI release a few years back about people mentioning the Constitution as being terrorists, and if it was true? Answer: Yes.

Here's the short version:



"Domestic Terrorist" is defined as:* "Groups or individuals entirely inside the US, attempting to influence the US government or population, to effect political or social change by engaging in criminal activity."
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/FBI-MCSOTerroristFlyer-Front.jpg

Here are the Official FBI Categories & Definitions of
"Domestic Terrorist"(s):

"Right-Wing Extremists"-- defined as:*

Defenders of US Constitution against Federal Government and the UN {Super Patriots};
Groups or individuals engaged in para-military training.


"Left-Wing Terrorism" -- "Political motivation is usually Marxist/Leninist philosophy."* Taking a page from Hitler's Nazi book, our government stokes the fires of Anti-Communism in this rule.* Hitler gained much Right-Wing support simply and only because of his Anti-Communist stance.

"Hate Groups" -- defined as:*

Skinheads, Nazis, Neo-Nazis (usually recognized by tattoos);
Black Separatists;
KKK [Ku Klux Klan];
Christian Identity;
White Nationalists


"Common Law Movement Proponents" -- defined as:

Fictitious license plates;
No license plates;
Fictitious driver's license;
Refuse to Identify Themselves;
Request Authority For Stop;
Make Numerous references to US Constitution;
Claim driving is a right, not a privilege;
Attempt to 'police the police'."


"Single Issue Terrorists" -- defined as:

Targeting of law enforcement and emergency personnel;
Animal Rights;
Eco-Terrorism;
Violent anti-abortion extremism;
Urban riot agitators;
Cyber penetration;
Non-Aligned Terrorists;
Doomsday Cult-Type Group;
Insurgents/Rebels;
Lone Individuals.


LOL on that last one, since I am a single individual!
Further discussion on each of the above definitions is in the artice below..

[...]

F.B.I. IDENTIFYING DOMESTIC TERRORISTS
http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1579.cfm

[politicsNproverbs]

200-300 thousand Ron Paul supporters join the army, take it over and take back our country.

:D I like that idea IF it would settle the issue once and for all... (not holding my breath on that one). Not that I want to have to get up at 5am every morning... and if the "army" would let me have an office job since I'm not much good at anything else... I definitely can't cook... ;)

[politicsNproverbs]

Some bankers and powerful interests allegedly wanted to put General Smedly Butler in power in the 1930s as a public face for outright dictatorship, but Butler was against the idea after approached and blew their cover, so the coup never came.

That's fascinating. Good for him.

I can see Bush as the perfect Dictator... dufus, goofus bumbling idiot though he is... But who else would enjoy more giving his "slaves" the finger, as he is so "famous" for doing? :cool:

[CountryMe]

So according to what you posted:

Quote:
"Domestic Terrorist" is defined as:* "Groups or individuals entirely inside the US, attempting to influence the US government or population, to effect political or social change by engaging in criminal activity."

Those of us that were trying to PEACEABLY influence (for the better) those in Congress to vote no on the bailout were engaging in criminal activity and we are terrorists????

If we were holding a gun to their heads and threatening to them to vote no the way some in the House were threatening with Martial Law, that to me would be criminal but not peaceful communications. It should only be criminal if it's violent or tries to hurt others!

This is all crazy!!!!!!!!!! Now when are we all going to have to shut up?????

[politicsNproverbs]

Here's a kicker...


"...on September 26th [26 = 2x13], 1961, Public Law 87-297 and H.R. 9118 [can't help but notice the 911 in that #] was passed by the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives calling for “The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their establishment in any form whatsoever, other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations peace force.”
Source: http://www.lasttrumpetministries.org/2004/January2004a.html

Regarding soldiers being asked if they would/could kill US citizens, etc.


U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens
Iraq vet exposes how he was trained to round up Americans
in martial law exercise, asked if he would kill his own friends and family
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, February 4th, 2008
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/020408_shoot_americans.htm

Compare that with the "snitch-training programs," such as local "Citizen Observer" programs, the "Neighborhood Watch" programs, and the FBI's InfraGard snitches (private citizens in business and industry, now 23,000+ strong, who work w/the FBI):


"One business executive, who showed me his InfraGard card, told me they have permission to “shoot to kill” in the event of martial law." - InfraGard: the FBI’s Privatized Shock Troops by Matthew Rothschild: http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1905

Also, remember this prior news article, June 2004, re: the 46-question "test" that soldiers were given to determine if they are willing to kill fellow Americans if any citizen refuses to give up his private firearm:


"Test" to Kill US Citizens @ Camp Lejuene
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/THE_PARADISE_REPORTER/message/1411

And this one:


Shooting People is FUN, says US Marine General
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/THE_PARADISE_REPORTER/message/1979

Story originally from PRISON PLANET.com
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2005/030205funtoshoot.htm
or at NBC San Diego:
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/4153541/detail.html
WATCH THE VIDEO, too, at prison planet.

And...


U.S. MILITARY CIVIL DISTURBANCE PLANNING:
THE WAR AT HOME
By Frank Morales

Under the heading of "civil disturbance planning", the U.S. military is training troops and police to suppress democratic opposition in America. The master plan, Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, is code-named, "Operation Garden Plot". Originated in 1968...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/THE_PARADISE_REPORTER/message/4018

Found one more while digging through my "Police State" folder...


Feb. 13, 2006 issue of NEWSWEEK - In the latest twist in the debate over presidential powers, a Justice Department official suggested that in certain circumstances, the president might have the power to order the killing of terrorist suspects inside the United States. (Might these suspects be you and I?) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11180519/site/newsweek/

Newsweek tip and comment above compliments of a ghosttroop (yahoogroup) poster.

[politicsNproverbs]

So according to what you posted:

Quote:
"Domestic Terrorist" is defined as:* "Groups or individuals entirely inside the US, attempting to influence the US government or population, to effect political or social change by engaging in criminal activity."

Those of us that were trying to PEACEABLY influence (for the better) those in Congress to vote no on the bailout were engaging in criminal activity and we are terrorists????

If we were holding a gun to their heads and threatening to them to vote no the way some in the House were threatening with Martial Law, that to me would be criminal but not peaceful communications. It should only be criminal if it's violent or tries to hurt others!

This is all crazy!!!!!!!!!! Now when are we all going to have to shut up?????

Crazy but true. But it's obviously not being ENFORCED yet, well, not toooo much ("free speech zones" at political conventions, those wire cages they set up last time, etc.)

The way I understand it is all these "laws" have been put "on the books" by Bush & Co. and WHEN THEY ARE READY to "go public," with it, THEN you may have to "shut up" as you word it. :(

[politicsNproverbs]

Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51) SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE PART "A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on."

I only just heard about that #51 law earlier this morning when I got an email from Ron at the One Dollar DVD Project. He shared these video links, which I have not watched yet...


I thought it was interesting to learn that Hitler had a law that said the same thing, and that Hitler's law was ALSO CALLED directive 51.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMs733gFg-I

Ray Taliaferro - Directive 51 Dictator Bush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNXg6QOIsJE=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNXg6QOIsJE&feature=related

Snipped from Ron's email which I posted here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/THE_PARADISE_REPORTER/message/5731