FrankRep
01-20-2010, 02:22 PM
A number of commentators have opined recently about an article written by Obama’s close friend, Cass Sunstein, the czar of the Orwellian sounding Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs but what many conservatives either do not know or do not remember is that the Clinton administration had a government program that was designed to investigate and neutralize the conservative movement called Project Megiddo. by Art Thompson
1st Amendment – Who Cares? (http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5866-1st-amendment-who-cares)
Art Thompson | John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
20 January 2010
A number of commentators have opined recently about an article written by Obama’s close friend, Cass Sunstein (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585), the czar of the Orwellian sounding Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs while he was a professor at Harvard University.
The article speculated as to what the government could do about various organizations that hold with conspiracy theories (as if it is any business of the government in the first place as to what opinions are held by people.)
In the paper, Sunstein says:
What can government do about conspiracy theories? Among the things it can do, what should it do? We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help. Each instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5).
What many conservatives either do not know or do not remember is that the Clinton administration had a government program that was designed to investigate and neutralize the conservative movement. It was called Project Megiddo (http://www.constitution.org/y2k/megiddo.pdf). Clinton directed the FBI in 1995 to focus their investigative efforts towards domestic terrorism such as the Christian Right and the Militias.
This type of thinking has hampered the ability of the true patriots within our intelligence community from concentrating their efforts on real domestic terrorists and may have already cost this country the full measure of justice in such cases as the Oklahoma City bombing since, as revealed by investigations by William F. Jasper, Senior Editor of The New American magazine, foreign terrorist suspects were likely involved.
As in the Clinton administration, we see the Obama administration, through the Department of Homeland Security, being concerned about their political opposition, by issuing a report stating that the potential terrorists are pro-life activists, constitutionalists, and even Iraqi War veterans. Both Bill and Barack seem quite concerned about stifling anyone who may oppose them by calling them terrorists.
It sounds a great deal like what Lenin did when the Bolsheviks took over Russia and called all of their opponents terrorists. Remember Hillary talked about the “vast right wing conspiracy” as being the real problem in America. Now she is Secretary of State sitting down at the table, so to speak, negotiating with those who are behind the real terrorists.
Increasingly, we see an attitude in government that the people are only to pay taxes and keep their mouths shut, especially those who remember that we have a Law in this country called the Constitution and that it was primarily aimed at shackling government so that it could not tell people what to think or say.
I guess that attacking the vast right wing conspiracy is good. Attacking the left wing conspiracy is bad.
With this kind of attitude, how in the world does anyone think that we can win a war on terror — if that is the real agenda? Or is the real agenda the elimination of all opposition to the socialist agenda while the War on Terror is a ploy to busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels as William Shakespeare put it so well in Henry IV?
Sunstein is being talked about as a possible future Supreme Court nominee. One shutters to think of a man who obviously has no regard for the 1st Amendment being mentioned as someone who will decide cases involving the Bill Of Rights. With his ideas, he would, I hope, find confirmation difficult. Nonetheless, the idea that people in Washington would even promote Sunstein for this position is disturbing.
In fact, it sounds like a conspiracy to me.
It also sounds as if we have to get involved or lose all of our rights.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5866-1st-amendment-who-cares
1st Amendment – Who Cares? (http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5866-1st-amendment-who-cares)
Art Thompson | John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
20 January 2010
A number of commentators have opined recently about an article written by Obama’s close friend, Cass Sunstein (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585), the czar of the Orwellian sounding Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs while he was a professor at Harvard University.
The article speculated as to what the government could do about various organizations that hold with conspiracy theories (as if it is any business of the government in the first place as to what opinions are held by people.)
In the paper, Sunstein says:
What can government do about conspiracy theories? Among the things it can do, what should it do? We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help. Each instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5).
What many conservatives either do not know or do not remember is that the Clinton administration had a government program that was designed to investigate and neutralize the conservative movement. It was called Project Megiddo (http://www.constitution.org/y2k/megiddo.pdf). Clinton directed the FBI in 1995 to focus their investigative efforts towards domestic terrorism such as the Christian Right and the Militias.
This type of thinking has hampered the ability of the true patriots within our intelligence community from concentrating their efforts on real domestic terrorists and may have already cost this country the full measure of justice in such cases as the Oklahoma City bombing since, as revealed by investigations by William F. Jasper, Senior Editor of The New American magazine, foreign terrorist suspects were likely involved.
As in the Clinton administration, we see the Obama administration, through the Department of Homeland Security, being concerned about their political opposition, by issuing a report stating that the potential terrorists are pro-life activists, constitutionalists, and even Iraqi War veterans. Both Bill and Barack seem quite concerned about stifling anyone who may oppose them by calling them terrorists.
It sounds a great deal like what Lenin did when the Bolsheviks took over Russia and called all of their opponents terrorists. Remember Hillary talked about the “vast right wing conspiracy” as being the real problem in America. Now she is Secretary of State sitting down at the table, so to speak, negotiating with those who are behind the real terrorists.
Increasingly, we see an attitude in government that the people are only to pay taxes and keep their mouths shut, especially those who remember that we have a Law in this country called the Constitution and that it was primarily aimed at shackling government so that it could not tell people what to think or say.
I guess that attacking the vast right wing conspiracy is good. Attacking the left wing conspiracy is bad.
With this kind of attitude, how in the world does anyone think that we can win a war on terror — if that is the real agenda? Or is the real agenda the elimination of all opposition to the socialist agenda while the War on Terror is a ploy to busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels as William Shakespeare put it so well in Henry IV?
Sunstein is being talked about as a possible future Supreme Court nominee. One shutters to think of a man who obviously has no regard for the 1st Amendment being mentioned as someone who will decide cases involving the Bill Of Rights. With his ideas, he would, I hope, find confirmation difficult. Nonetheless, the idea that people in Washington would even promote Sunstein for this position is disturbing.
In fact, it sounds like a conspiracy to me.
It also sounds as if we have to get involved or lose all of our rights.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5866-1st-amendment-who-cares