"Thinking For Yourself Is Now A Crime" - Paul Craig Roberts

[Holly]

.
.
Can this really be happening?

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19002.htm

[raiha]

Here is what Dr Paul wrote on the subject:

http://pressmediawire.com/article.cfm?articleID=4514

Also, people need to know that Obama approves of this insidious legislation. This is our greatest debating edge over Obama supporters. Are they all in lala land? Or what?

And here is where everyone will end up when the civil unrest gets out of hand. They're ready:

http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/fema.htm

[Virginia Libertarian]

Buy guns.

[hairball]

Kinda sound like the Red Scare, when peple were told to snitch out neighbors who may be 'pink' inside.

The thing is about this handy peice of legislation is that it has no teeth. It is only a commission for research. While this may be prblematic, it is not the kind of information gathering tool the we currently have.

Anyone remember Carnivore? That is one of the great info gathering tolls that is being used right now on the computers. The problem is one of volume. While all our communication is being monitered, none of it can be administered because the sheer volume keeps the focus from being too tightly focused on any individual, unless they have a record of voilence or on some international list of terrorists. Even then, the odd terrorist or a dozen still slip through the cracks, because the crack are so big.

In spite of the authors' best intent, the panic button is not to be hit yet. Worse assaults than this have been defeated or ignored into oblivion.

[liberty_rp08]

The bill passed the House on a vote of 404-6. In the Senate the bill is sponsored by Maine Republican Susan Collins and apparently faces no meaningful opposition.

Harman’s bill is called the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act.” [ http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1955 ] When HR 1955 becomes law, it will create a commission tasked with identifying extremist people, groups, and ideas. The commission will hold hearings around the country, taking testimony and compiling a list of dangerous people and beliefs. The bill will, in short, create massive terrorism in the United States. But the perpetrators of terrorism will not be Muslim terrorists; they will be government agents and fellow citizens.

We are beginning to see who will be the inmates of the detention centers being built in the US by Halliburton under government contract.

Who will be on the “extremist beliefs” list? The answer is: civil libertarians, critics of Israel, 9/11 skeptics, critics of the administration’s wars and foreign policies, critics of the administration’s use of kidnapping, rendition, torture and violation of the Geneva Conventions, and critics of the administration’s spying on Americans. Anyone in the way of a powerful interest group--such as environmentalists opposing politically connected developers--is also a candidate for the list.

The “Extremist Beliefs Commission” is the mechanism for identifying Americans who pose “a threat to domestic security” and a threat of “homegrown terrorism” that “cannot be easily prevented through traditional federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts.”

Life in the USSA. Orwell was only off by 17 years, folks.

[notcarljung]

the fact that it passed through the house by such a wide margin is nothing short of.... horrible? i thought the democrats were protecting civil liberties!! What happened to that? *Cough*Hypocrites*Cough*

in the very best case scenario, this act would only be used to round up american muslims who don't meet some thought litmus test. kind of like imprisoning Japanese people during world war 2. As bad as that is, it could prove to be much worse!

what if, in light of all the recent school shootings, the government decides most shy kids could go on a killing spree? That was my second thought while reading the bill.

Anywhoo, the ways this can and probably will be abused are too many to count. heh. wait that's not funny...

[Ira Aten]

Although I respect Paul Craig Roberts, the following statement in the article is NOT TRUE. I quote from the article: "...On October 23, 2007, the House passed a bill sponsored by California Democratic congresswoman Jane Harman, chairwoman of a Homeland Security subcommittee, that overturns the constitutionally guaranteed rights to free expression, association, and assembly."

When Mr. Roberts claims the Bill "overturns" the constitutionally guaranteed right under the First Amendment, he is wrong. Passing an unconstitutional law, dos NOT "overturn" the Bill of Rights. In fact, the Constitution itself says so under Article VI.

Article VI says the Congress may not pass any mandate which is "...not in pursuance of" the Constitution itself. For this Act to be constitutionally lawful, they would have to had a two third majority vote of both houses, to VOID the First Amendment.

As everyone knows, the Supreme Court has ALREADY ruled, in Miranda vs. Arizona, that any law which would abridge any right guaranteed under the Bill of Rights, is not valid. It is moot. Period. And all executive branch officers are banned from enforcing such a law.

So the question is, are we going to allow the Federal Government to enforce against us, a law which clearly abridges the First Amendment. The first way to guarantee that law enforcement officers enforce such illegal laws, is to begin a rumor, that says the First Amendment has been "overturned" by Congress, when the Constitution says it CANNOT BE DONE!