FCC Plan For Newsroom Monitors Sparks Constitutional Concern As FCC Plans to Issue New 'Net Neutrality' Rules… Wake Up America

Video: Is Government Going To Control What News You See & Hear - Obama Admin Attack On First Amendment

Is Government Going To Control What News You See & Hear?  The Obama Administration is attacking our First Amendment - Special Report  -->  Wake The Hell Up America…  And as a reminder, the Second Amendment is there to protect First Amendment

By Marion Algier – Ask Marion

Greta Van Susteren is outraged on the February 19th when this fame to light and discuss with a panel: Byron York, Karen Tumulty (WaPo) & AB Stoddard

Byron York mentions an article on Feb 10, by a Republican FCC commissioner, Ajit Pai: on The FCC Wades Into the Newsroom at WSJ.com and another attempt at Net Neutrality.

She asks the question: Who thought this was a good idea?

Video: Obama's News Police - WH Pushes FCC To Install Newsroom Spies - Attack On First Amendment

Video: News Police Exposed - Obama Admin Pushes FCC To Install Newsroom Spies - On The Record

Video: Renee Ellmers: Plan to put monitors in newsrooms is latest attempt by Obama Admin to trample

Former Fox host Glenn Beck warned that this would be coming back in 2009!  Obama’s former FCC Czar admired Hugo Chavez & Wanted To Emulate Venezuela’s Control of Speech & Communication~

FCC Plans to Issue New 'Net Neutrality' Rules

Cables and routers at a Comcast distribution center where the Comcast regional video, high speed data and voice are piped out to customers on Feb. 13, 2014 in Miramar, Fla. Getty Images

WSJ:  WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission said Wednesday it would again issue rules to prevent Internet service providers from blocking or slowing down access to content providers that don't pay a toll to reach consumers.

However, analysts said the rules could open the door for broadband providers to cut deals with content companies like Netflix Inc. NFLX -1.97% or Google Inc. GOOG -0.71% to give their products some kind of advantage, either though speed or prominent placement.

The FCC's announcement means it doesn't plan to reclassify broadband as a public utility at present, as Democrats and public-interest groups had urged. Doing so would give the FCC much greater authority to set rules for broadband providers.

Supporters say treating all Internet traffic equally, a concept known as net neutrality, is crucial to keeping the Internet open and allowing smaller companies to compete with the biggest content providers. But the courts have ruled against the FCC's previous attempts to enforce net neutrality on companies like Comcast Corp. CMCSA -3.66% and Verizon Communications Inc. VZ +1.20% that provide Internet connections to households and businesses.

Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit threw out FCC rules barring providers from blocking or slowing down websites, but it acknowledged the FCC has some authority to regulate broadband-company practices under a section of the 1996 Telecommunications Act that gives it broad authority to encourage U.S. broadband service.

The FCC said Wednesday it won't appeal the D.C. Circuit's ruling. Instead, it plans to take advantage of Section 706, of the law to propose new rules in the late spring or early summer, after soliciting public comment.

"The FCC must stand strongly behind its responsibility to oversee the public interest standard and ensure that the Internet remains open and fair," FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said in a statement. "The Internet is and must remain the greatest engine of free expression, innovation, economic growth and opportunity the world has ever known."

The court said in January that the FCC could impose a "no blocking" rule if it found a different legal justification. Mr. Wheeler's statement indicates the FCC will do just that, by establishing a minimum standard for how broadband companies treat content. The rules would likely outline expectations and unacceptable practices for broadband providers, and provide for case-by-case enforcement when websites complain of unfair discrimination.

Analysts said the new rules could pave the way for deals between Internet providers and content companies to carry their content to consumers at higher speeds. Paul Gallant, a telecom policy analyst at Guggenheim Securities, said his reading of the commission's principles is that the agency is more likely to focus on policing anti-competitive conduct than on discouraging the content deals.

"I think the FCC will be inclined to permit voluntary paid prioritization deals," he said.

Even with that caveat, Republicans are opposed to the new proposed rules. "I am deeply concerned by the announcement that the FCC will begin considering new ways to regulate the Internet," FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly said. "The Obama administration refuses to abandon its furious pursuit of these harmful policies to put government in charge of the Web," House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R., Mich.) and Rep. Greg Walden (R., Ore.) said in a statement.

Any rules would have to be approved by a vote of the five-member commission, which includes three Democrats and two Republicans.

Net neutrality supporters, however, were disappointed with the FCC's decision not to reclassify broadband Internet as a public utility, which they had argued was the only way to make the rules stand up in court.

Andy Schwartzman, a telecom lawyer and adviser to the anti-media consolidation group Free Press, said not reclassifying broadband "would be repeating the biggest mistake" made during prior efforts by former FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.

Broadband providers have argued that reclassification would be disastrous for the industry because it would subject them to regulations designed for the landline phone system. "We think reclassification would probably be the ultimate death of the broadband market," Comcast Executive Vice President David Cohen said in an interview last week. "We think it would dry up private investment and destroy all the gains made in the broadband market in the U.S."

Cohen's comments were made in the context of his company's bid to acquire Time Warner Cable Inc. TWC -2.75% Comcast has already agreed to abide by the FCC's net neutrality rules, even though they were struck down in court, as part of its acquisition of NBC-Universal in 2011. Comcast has also agreed to extend the agreement to Time Warner Cable Inc. subscribers if that acquisition is approved.

Mr. Wheeler has left the reclassification option open for now, which could serve as a deterrent for broadband providers seeking to challenge the rules in court again.

A Verizon spokesman said the company said it wouldn't appeal last month's court ruling, and that it is too early to determine whether it would challenge the FCC's latest rules.

As part of the process, the FCC will also examine ways to encourage competition in the broadband market. That could include removing legal restrictions that prevent cities and towns from building their own broadband or Wi-Fi networks. 

The Rewards Of ‘Cooperation’ With The NSA – Verizon Given Huge Federal Contract

FCC Plan For Newsroom Monitors Sparks Constitutional Concern - Wake Up America - America's Newsroom

Sekulow explains this very well - FCC gives license to broadcasters, but the FCC is also doing this for newspapers which do not come under the authority of the FCC.

Video (Martha McCallum with Jordan Sekulow): FCC Plan For Newsroom Monitors Sparks Constitutional Concern - Wake Up America - America's Newsroom

Audio: RUSH: Media Wouldn’t Oppose Regime Monitors In Newsrooms

RUSH/EIB: It’s clear the Regime thought they could get away with doing this this time. Hugo Chavez used to do things like this all the time. Now, here’s the question. Let’s just go hypothetically here. Let’s say that Adweek did not discover the study has been suspended. Let’s say it’s gonna go forward. At some point, they’re gonna try it. Will major American media organizations stand up and righteously, indignantly oppose this?

I can make the case that I don’t think they would.  Most people think instinctively, reflexively, the media not gonna put up with it something like that.  “No way! You’re gonna have a government monitor in my newsroom? You’re gonna be quote/unquote ‘monitoring’ the stories I choose to cover and the stories I don’t want to cover, and you are gonna be cataloging what you think is my bias?  No way, pal!”  But I can see where, given the current circumstances that exist today, they wouldn’t oppose it. 

In fact, I could make the case to you that they would welcome it.  I explained this to Snerdley today.  He could not believe me.  He did not believe that I was being serious.  “You’re joking,” he said.  No.  I can make the case where journalism schools would not oppose it but instead will support it — and I’ll bet I could make the case to you, given current circumstances.  I think the media might look at it as an opportunity to get even closer to Obama.  I think some might look at it as a way of impressing Obama. Read more HERE

Video: FCC Proposes Initiative To Study How Journalists Operate - Attack On First Amendment?  

Video: WaPo Reporter: Plan to put monitors in newsrooms is like ATF walking into a gunshop

Judge Andrew Napolitano’s head is exploding -!!! Chilling!  The Judge explains where it came from: the White House instructions to FCC.  Freedom of the press is guaranteed in first amendment.  This is a radical new era of tyranny in the White House says the judge.  Currently it is voluntary but Judge Nap says that would eventually change. Allowing this another camel’s nose under the tent situation.  You and every journalist should be outraged!!

Video: Media Grilling - Does FCC Study Violate Freedom Of The Press? - Judge Andrew Napolitano F&F

Technorati Tags: FCC,Net-Neutrality,Big Brother Tactics,Rush Limbaugh,Beck,Verizon,UnConstitutional,Freedom of Speech,Fox,WaPo,Freedom of the Press,Bill of Rights,Constitution,ATF,Alert,Sekulow,Stealing Elections,Wake-Up,1984,Stand-Up,Judge Napolitano,Elections Have Consequences

Today… A Car That Takes Your Pulse, Tomorrow A Card or Implant That Controls Your Life

WSJ – Cross-Posted at AskMarion and at True Health Is True Wealth: What the car of the near future will sense about your biology. Auto makers are researching technology that could feed your heart rate, blood pressure and other biometric responses into the car's computers, the better to determine when you're drowsy or overwhelmed with distracting media. MIT researcher Bryan Reimer and WSJ's Joe White has details on Lunch Break. See Video

A Car That Takes Your Pulse

Designing Vehicles To Monitor Brain Waves, Sleepiness

Could a car that knows when you are stressed or ill save you from having an accident? Auto makers are stepping up efforts to find out.

A number of big car manufacturers are accelerating research into equipping vehicles with so-called biometric sensors that would keep tabs on a driver's vital health signs, including pulse, breathing and "skin conductance," aka sweaty palms. When that information is fed into the computers that manage a car's safety systems, it could enable a vehicle to better react to whatever challenges the road and traffic dish out.

The move comes amid major advances in mobile medical-monitoring technology, as well as growing concerns about meeting the needs of an aging and increasingly distracted population of motorists.

It also reflects another step in the industry's broader move toward self-driving cars, a brave new world in which computers could all but eliminate the potential for driver error—whether it's due to a distracting phone call or a sudden drop in blood sugar.

Already, some Lexus models use in-cabin cameras and some Mercedes-Benz vehicles have steering sensors to detect drowsy-driving behavior. The cars sound a warning beep or flash a coffee-cup icon to suggest that it's time for a break. Luxury brands are promoting these accident-avoidance technologies as examples of what sets their expensive vehicles apart from cheaper, mainstream models. The Mercedes system, called Attention Assist, comes as standard equipment in a wide range of its vehicles, from the smaller C-class sedans to the more opulent, and high-tech, S-class models.

View Interactive

Separately, car makers and federal safety regulators are working on in-vehicle systems that could reliably detect when someone is too drunk to drive.

The new body monitors could, if a driving hazard appeared imminent, trigger the car's safety systems to tap the brakes, turn off a radio, block a cellphone from ringing or take other actions. Some of these advances may be in cars in three to five years. Others depend upon whether researchers can crack the challenge of designing health-related sensors that can work flawlessly in a vehicle for up to a decade.

Sports car maker Ferrari SpA, for one, has filed a patent application that indicates the company is evaluating technology that would embed wireless electrodes in a car seat's headrest to monitor drivers' brain waves for stress as they pilot machines capable of roaring up to 200 miles per hour. Depending on what the sensors detect, the car might try to mitigate the driver's risk by cutting power to the motor or automatically stabilizing the vehicle. As Ferrari researchers put it in the patent filing: "drivers tend to miscalculate—in particular, overestimate—their driving skill and, more important, their psychophysical condition."

At Ford Motor Co., F +1.26%researchers are looking at connecting information from medical monitors, like seat-belt-based respiration sensors and steering-wheel heart-rate trackers, to its cars' in-dash multimedia systems.

Ford's prototype system aims to lessen distraction by taking readouts from biometric sensors and combining the data with information from the car, including speed, steering-wheel angle, and data from radar sensors or cameras used in blind-spot obstacle detection or cruise control. All the data are run through software that can gauge the driver's overall stress level. If it is high, the system could automatically engage a "Do Not Disturb" function for the driver's phone.

Jeff Greenberg, a senior technical leader involved with the Ford research, says the broad goal is to minimize driver distraction and stress. This may involve keeping people engaged and alert on a boring drive to work or helping them stay focused in more difficult driving moments. If a truck looms out of the blind spot during a high-speed freeway merge, for example, a driver would be better off if his phone's ringer was disabled at that moment, he says.

Mr. Greenberg says phone-disabling technology could come to showrooms "relatively quickly." Adding the biometric sensors, he says, "is further out." Ford classifies those technologies as research projects that typically are at least three to five years from being offered to consumers.

One reason: The technology is evolving faster than issues such as medical privacy and regulatory oversight can be resolved. Ford, like other auto makers, is loath to add the Food and Drug Administration to an already heavy regulatory load.

Car makers hope that vehicles with medical monitors will appeal to an aging population that wants to keep driving.

"If we want to keep people in their vehicles, it's key we integrate systems to support them," says Bryan Reimer, a researcher with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology AgeLab, which focuses on innovations for an aging population. AgeLab has worked with Toyota Motor Corp., 7203.TO -1.56%Ford and other companies to test how biometric sensors could be used both to guide the design of vehicles to make them easier to operate and as onboard systems to help people drive more safely.

Getty Images/Onoky

A number of big car manufacturers are accelerating research into equipping vehicles with so-called biometric sensors that would keep tabs on a driver's vital health signs.

Dick Myrick, a 63-year-old retired electrical engineer from Arlington, Mass., participated in AgeLab experiments in biometrically monitored driving. His says he would be interested in a car that kept tabs on his condition as part of its safety technology, but only if he was in control of the system. "I need to know that the function is on, and have it not on when I want," he says.

Others see the new technology as yet another thing to keep track of behind the wheel. It's "a further distraction" for drivers, says Gabrielle Lucci, 60, a Farmington Hills, Mich., retiree.

Devices that collect data about an individual's physical condition are getting cheaper and smaller. Many are designed to connect to smartphones using the same Bluetooth technology that connects smartphones to cars. This provides a gateway for wirelessly connecting devices like glucose or heart monitors into a car's multimedia displays.

"The same sensor you are wearing for your weekend warrior stuff…is the sensor you could slap on your mother" to monitor her heart, says Leslie Saxon, a cardiologist who leads the University of Southern California's Center for Body Computing. Dr. Saxon's project recently formed a research alliance with German luxury car maker BMW BMW.XE +0.72% AG.

Daniel Grein, a BMW designer, says the USC research could help determine how to connect a Bluetooth-equipped blood-sugar monitor to future BMW models. In Munich, he says, BMW engineers are also investigating how to design a car that could automatically stop if the driver suffered a heart attack.

Dr. Saxon says he sees a time when biometric monitors in a car could feed data, not just to onboard safety systems, but also to doctors and patients looking to better manage health care. "My car calls me when it needs something," Dr. Saxon says, referring to vehicle-service alerts generated by the car. "I want patients' cars to call them when they need blood-pressure medicine."

Sound interesting? Might increase safety? But as Founding Father Benjamin Franklin said, “He who trades security (or safety) for freedom" usually gets (nor deserves) either!!” Wake-up America, Europe, Christians, Patriots, lovers of freedom… this is Big Brother 1984 style all the way! Today it is a smart car… tomorrow it will be a smart card. Be sure to watch the video below and then you be the judge!

Video: Smart card (made 2005)

Related:

Now Big Brother is REALLY watching you

Smart Dust Computers… Vaccination Nanotechnology… NWO Here We Come

RFID Chip for all Americans in 2013 as Part of ObamaCare… See Biden Telling Fed Judge He Will Have to Rule on Implanted Microchips

Christian Family Refuses Mandatory RFID Chip at Texas School

MARK OF THE BEAST IS COMING SOON ! – WIFE STANDS UP FOR JESUS AND AGINST THE RFID IMPLANT AT HOSPITAL — GOD BLESS HER FOR HER STRENGTH OF CONVICTION

Buying and Selling in an RFID Chip for the First Time – VeriChip Changes Its Name

FBI begins installation of $1 billion face recognition system across America

Technorati Tags: Smart Card,Smart Car,Big Brother,watch the other hand,RFID,Implants,Big Brother is watching you,1984,RFID chip part of healthcare bill,NWO,safety,smoke and mirrors,BMW,smartphones,wake- up,wake-up America,biometric monitors,Benjamin Franklin,safety vs freedom

Christian Family Refuses Mandatory RFID Chip at Texas School

Video:  Christian Family Refuses Mandatory RFID Chip at Texas School

Tracking School Children With RFID Tags? It’s All About the Benjamins

Student body ID cards with RFID-embedded chips. Image: Northside Independent School District

Just as the U.S. Department of Agriculture mandates Radio Frequency Identification Device chips to monitor livestock, a Texas school district just begun implanting the devices on student identification cards to monitor pupils’ movements on campus, and to track them as they come and go from school.

Tagging school children with RFID chips is uncommon, but not new. A federally funded preschool in Richmond, California, began embedding RFID chips in students’ clothing in 2010. And an elementary school outside of Sacramento, California, scrubbed a plan in 2005 amid a parental uproar. And a Houston, Texas, school district began using the chips to monitor students on 13 campuses in 2004.

It was only a matter of time. Radio frequency identification devices are a daily part of the electronic age, and are fast becoming a part of passports, libraries and payment cards, and are widely expected to replace bar-code labels on consumer goods.

And it appears that the educational move to Big Brother-style monitoring is motivated mainly by money, despite privacy and health concerns.

Two schools at the Northside Independent School District in San Antonio began issuing the RFID-chip-laden student-body cards when classes began last Monday. Like most state-financed schools, their budgets are tied to average daily attendance. If a student is not in his seat during morning roll call, the district doesn’t receive daily funding for that pupil, because the school has no way of knowing for sure if the student is there.

But with the RFID tracking, students not at their desk but tracked on campus are counted as being in school that day, and the district receives its daily allotment for that student.

“What we have found, they are there, they’re in the building and not in their chairs. They are in the cafeteria, with counselors, in stairwells or a variety of places, some legitimately and some not,” district spokesman Pascual Gonzalez said in a telephone interview. “If they are on campus, we can legally count them present.”

The Spring Independent School District in Houston echoed the same theory when it announced results of its program in 2010. “RFID readers situated throughout each campus are used to identify where students are located in the building, which can be used to verify the student’s attendance for ADA funding and course credit purposes,” the district said.

But privacy groups are wary.

“We don’t think kids in schools should be treated like cattle,” Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said in a telephone interview. “We generally don’t like it. My take on RFID is it’s fine for products, but not so much for people. That’s one of the places where the lines need to be drawn. ”

But there appears to be dozens of companies who see no need to draw such a line and offer their RFID wares to monitor students in what is still a tiny but growing market. Among the biggest companies in the market: AT&T.

“One day soon, home room teachers in your local middle and high schools may stop scanning rows of desks and making each student yell out ‘Here!’ during a morning roll call. Instead, small cards, or tags, carried by each student will transmit a unique serial number via radio signal to an electronic reader near the school door,” AT&T says in its RFID-student advertising materials.

Gonzalez said there has been minimal parental and student opposition to the program at John Jay High School and Anson Jones Middle School. The pilot project could expand to the Northside Independent School District’s 110 other schools, he said.

As for privacy, the system only monitors a student’s movements on campus. Once a student leaves campus, the chips no longer communicate with the district’s sensors.

He said the chips, which are not encrypted and chronicle students only by a serial number, also assist school officials to pinpoint where kids are at any given time, which he says is good for safety reasons. “With this RFID, we know exactly where the kid is within the school,” he said noting students are required to wear the ID on a lanyard at all times on campus.

The lack of encryption makes it not technically difficult to clone a card to impersonate a fellow student or to create a substitute card to play hooky, and makes the cards readable by anyone who wanted to install their own RFID reader, though all they would get is a serial number that’s correlated with the student’s ID number in a school database.

EPIC’s Rotenberg was among about two dozen health and privacy advocates who signed an August position paper blasting the use of RFID chips in schools.

The paper, which included signatures from the American Civil Liberties Union, Electronic Frontier Foundation and, among others, Big Brother Watch, said the RFID systems may have “potential” (.pdf) health risks, too.

“RFID systems emit electromagnetic radiation, and there are lingering questions about whether human health might be affected in environments where the reading devices are pervasive,” the paper said. “This concern and the dehumanizing effects of ubiquitous surveillance may place additional stress on students, parents, and teachers.”

Gonzalez said John Jay High has 200 surveillance cameras and Anson Jones Middle School, about 90.

“The kids,” he said, “are used to being monitored.”

Also Checkout: Parental Rights in the U.S. >> Go to http://parentalrights.org/

Related:

All Americans Will Receive a Microchip Implant in 2013 Per ObamaCare – Updated

RFID Chip for all Americans in 2013 as Part of ObamaCare… See Biden Telling Fed Judge He Will Have to Rule on Implanted Microchips

The ‘new chip’… especially for you!

Buying and Selling in an RFID Chip for the First Time – VeriChip Changes Its Name

RFID Clothing Tags Would Not Be Private Labels~

Global Elite Using Obesity Vaccines to Alter Minds and Curb Consumption

Technorati Tags: War on Christianity,Christians,Christianity,RFID chips,Texas,Big Brother,Constitution,parental rights,parenting,God,First Amendment,Bill of Rights,individual freedoms,freedom is not free,stand-up American,stand-up Christians,1984,Verichip in the Healthcare Bill,Verichip,Microchips,Smart Card

"THE DRONES ARE COMING!" Congressman Ted Poe

Video:  "THE DRONES ARE COMING!" Congressman Ted Poe

Technorati Tags: Big Brother,watch the other hand,Congress,Congressman Ted Poe,drones,big brother is watching you,wake-up America,stand-up America

Obama Assembling De Facto Propaganda Ministry

By Steve Peacock – WND

The U.S. State Department is planning to “buy” media broadcasts, as the Obama administration assembles a de facto propaganda machine, according to documents that reveal the president’s plans moving closer to the 2012 election.

According to information WND located via routine database research, State’s Bureau of Public Affairs is soliciting the help of “global news coverage service providers” to create and disseminate department “news.”

The selected contractor will provide “full-time, 24/7 service,” the Statement of Work for the plan said.

“The department seeks a service provider for full, turn-key news-style global television coverage of ad hoc open press events featuring the Secretary of State and other officials across the United States and throughout the world,” according to the SOW, “and to send this content back to the department’s Washington headquarters…”

Upon receiving these privately packaged productions, the department, in turn, “will distribute this video content to media organizations through an array of traditional and new media platforms.”

Indeed, just as the department is awaiting contractor bids on the project, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s representative at the World Press Freedom Day in Tunisia heaped accolades upon UNESCO for hosting the annual event.

Read about how the U.S. mission at the United Nations works with reporters, and find out what the White House does with some of those raising questions.

In a “tweet” from Tunisia, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Esther Brimmer said, “I applaud the tireless, continuing work of #UNESCO in promoting the ideals of free and open media.”

Brimmer delivered remarks on behalf of the Obama administration during the opening ceremony, along with presenting a video speech from Clinton.

Referring to the Arab Spring demonstrations across the Middle East and North Africa, Clinton said, according to a prepared statement, “Voice by voice, text by text, Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans and many others have dared to say what they believe and stand up for their own rights.

“Many others have dared to report on what they see happening, even when their lives were at risk.”

The State Department plan is twofold: to hire a single contractor to provide television news crew services on the one hand, and to provide transmission/streaming services as a corollary service.

“The television news crew category is both one and two-person crews, and includes one and multi-camera productions,” the SOW pointed out. “The transmission category includes both traditional fiber, terrestrial and satellite-based as well as file-based and Internet delivery platforms.”

The use of such government- as well as industry-funded broadcasts, known as “video news releases,” or VNRs, has increasingly come under fire in the past decade.

VNRs “are segments designed to be indistinguishable from independently produced news reports that are distributed and promoted to television newsrooms,” according to Source Watch, a Center for Media and Democracy project that chronicles the intersecting of public relations and public policy.

The General Accountability Office – the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress – in 2005 declared that several federal entities, such as the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services, may have violated the law by disseminating VNRs as fact-based news reports.

Subsequent to the GAO’s findings, the “Stop Government Propaganda Act” was introduced to rein in and punish such activities; it died, however, after being introduced in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Proponents of VNR distribution claim that use of the video products is wholly legitimate. The Public Relations Society of America is that a VNR simply is “the video equivalent of a press release.”

The organization does advocate that industry members abide by certain parameters to ensure the integrity of VNR usage:

1. Organizations that produce VNRs should clearly identify the VNR as such and fully disclose who produced and paid for it at the time the VNR is provided to TV stations.
2. PRSA recommends that organizations that prepare VNRs should not use the word “reporting” if the narrator is not a reporter.
3. Use of VNRs or footage provided by sources other than the station or network should be identified as to source by the media outlet when it is aired.

Despite congressional refusal to crack down on VNRs, the Federal Communications Commission issued a reminder to licensees of their sponsor-identification requirements under the Communications Act or 1934. Rather than holding liable the creators of the reports, the commission has placed the burden of disclosure on who ultimately airs the VNR.

“These rules are grounded in the principle that listeners and viewers are entitled to know who seeks to persuade them with the programming offered over broadcast stations and cable systems,” the FCC said.

When such VNRs are aired, “licensees and operators generally must clearly disclose to members of their audiences the nature, source and sponsorship of the material that they are viewing.”

Although the FCC continues to enforce these rules, the penalties arguably have been light.

Last year, for instance, it issued a forfeiture order to Fox Television Stations, Inc. when station affiliate KMSP-TV of Minneapolis used – but failed to identify – a General Motors-provided VNR during a news broadcast.

The FCC fined Fox $4,000 for failing to disclose GM sponsorship of the report.

Among other VNR-related enforcement actions, in 2007 it imposed a $4,000 fine on Comcast Corp. for also violating the sponsorship disclosure rules. Comcast’s CN8 news affiliate in that case had aired a VNR produced on behalf of Nelson’s Rescue Sleep.

The FCC soon after separately slapped a $16,000 forfeiture against Comcast for airing two VNRs from General Mills and Allstate, respectively.

The State Department through May 21 is reviewing contractor proposals in response to the new solicitation. It did not disclose the estimated cost of the endeavor, for which it will award a year contract with four one-year options.

Pathological Politics – Predatory Partners and Persecuting Patriots

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton - the NoisyRoom

In the notorious tradition of Nixon’s Enemies List, Obama is now openly persecuting patriots at every opportunity. He tries to shame them, taint them, marginalize them and if all that doesn’t work, he sends goons after them and either imprisons them or threatens them with imprisonment. He’s using every agency at his disposal, with a special emphasis on the EPA, FDA, IRS, SEC, ATF and Fish and Wildlife authorities. And he has hired a whole governmental ‘army’ to enforce his dictates and go after his enemies. Welcome to the American Stasi.

We have watched how Obama smears those who would dare to donate to Mitt Romney’s campaign. That should make us want to donate even more, not back down and cower in fear. We all know that Obama is determined to be reelected legally or illegally – he doesn’t care. He just wants to hold on to his power, so he can finish what he started – destroying America with his pathological politics of corruption, greed and evil. If the elections don’t suffice, he’ll invent an emergency to ensure his death grip on the throat of America.

Look at how Gibson Guitars has been treated. They have been raided multiple times, but they can’t defend themselves because in the last three years, this administration won’t say what crime they are charging them with. They are destroying a good and honest company that creates jobs and does business production here in America. Their crime – successful capitalism. Something Obama will not tolerate.

Then there are farmers. The EPA is clamping down on the Amish and others who don’t follow every regulation in an effort to put them out of business and it is working. I hear the stealthy, sly footsteps of Cass Sunstein. Soon, very soon, the government will control all our farmland and food. Then if you step out of line, they’ll just starve you to death. Farming on your own property will be illegal. It’s coming – bet on it. Right now they are seizing farmer’s bank accounts. The FDA is now using the terrorist based “Bank Secrecy Act” as justification to invade, investigate and even confiscate the bank accounts of Americans in the agricultural business.

From The Examiner:

The Bank Secrecy Act that came out of the events of 9/11, which has been expanded during the decade long war on terror, is now being used to criminally attack farmers who choose not to use banks as their sole or primary source for monetary transactions. This is especially relevant after the credit crisis of 2008, where many American[s] began withdrawing money from banks after bank solvency came into question.

This banking law, which allows for the unwarranted confiscation and seizure of funds based solely on perceived impropriety, is one of many new policies created under the Bush and Obama administrations to control the public, and the flow of money in the United States. Beginning in 2013, new capital controls are set to be implemented which will make it extremely difficult to move dollars in and out of the country, and more recently, the Obama administration diverted funds from other departments to hire thousands of IRS agents for the new healthcare system that will also commence in 2013.

Ted Nugent on Regulations

Glenn Beck – We Are All Criminals Now

Now, we turn to Ted Nugent, who has been all over the news as of late. Evidently Obama has had Ted Nugent in his sights for at least two years and probably much longer. Nugent was charged with breaking a law – of which the judge hadn’t even heard – while hunting black bear in Alaska. But you can bet the Feds did and they brought charges hoping to snare Nugent. But that didn’t work out as they intended – Nugent accepted that he ‘unknowingly’ broke the law and the sentence carried the same weight as jaywalking, a misdemeanor offense. They tried to snag him in California and accused him of baiting a deer. A total falsehood and you’d have to be a moron to do it since he was airing the episode on TV. They stormed three of his friends’ homes and then searched a room not covered by the search warrant. They found a set of brass knuckles and told Nugent’s friend they would drop the felony charge if he would help them ‘get’ Nugent. Fortunately Ted has very good friends. But they took all kinds of stuff from their homes.

Now, they have made Nugent slaughter his pigs in Michigan – labeling them as feral. Since when is livestock you keep in a pen ‘feral?’ Obviously they either don’t know or more likely, don’t care what the definition is. They were the wrong color and thus deemed ‘feral’ and Nugent was forced to slaughter them. It’s tempting to draw conclusions about motives related to winning points with the Dearbornistan locals, given that the “reason” for slaughtering the pigs is clearly a pretext; one wonders to oneself, could squeezing pig farmers be calibrated to curry favor with a Muslim community?

He’s also been persecuted for his Oryx in Texas as well. They are harassing him about raising these animals when he brought them back from the brink of extinction. A three legged little one was born and he is not being allowed to put it out of its misery. It will die a slow and painful death. How is that compassion? If he puts it down, it’s a felony.

Someone high up would not allow Nugent to attend a SEAL’s funeral when it was the hero’s final wish. His concerts have been cancelled in several cases as well. The Feds interviewed him over comments he made at an NRA conference recently. He was cleared, but I guess free speech is no longer very ‘free’ in this country. Nugent is a good man – a patriotic man. That’s a lot more than you can say about Obama and his thugs.

This isn’t just about Ted Nugent folks – it’s about each and every one of us. They are coming after the bloggers, the patriots, small businesses, you name it. There is no way we can avoid violating one of these bogus laws. It’s only a matter of time. Obama doesn’t care about the Constitution – it means nothing to him. They are coming and we had better stand together, or we will all hang separately as patriots. The way Nugent is being treated is absolutely disgraceful.

From Kim Strassel at the Wall Street Journal:

He’s targeted insurers, oil firms and Wall Street—letting it be known that those who oppose his policies might face political or legislative retribution. He lectured the Supreme Court for giving companies more free speech and (falsely) accused the Chamber of Commerce of using foreign money to bankroll U.S. elections. The White House even ginned up an executive order (yet to be released) to require companies to list political donations as a condition of bidding for government contracts. Companies could bid but lose out for donating to Republicans. Or they could quit donating to the GOP—Mr. Obama’s real aim.

We all know of Obama’s Enemies List, but do you know who his predatory partners are? Along with Communists and radicals, he has a special fondness for the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, he has opened the front door of the White House and has told them to make themselves at home. These are the evil asshats who support and fund Hamas. These are Islamic terrorists of the ilk that carried out 9-11 and Obama embraces them while persecuting American patriots.

Rumors of War III

Obama is not even subtle about it. They have removed all references to radical Islam in federal publications. They allow Shariah Law to be carried out on American soil. Obama’s best friend is the Prime Minister of Turkey who gives him advice on his daughters. You see, it doesn’t matter whether Obama is a Muslim or not, his father was. Obama has Islamic street cred. It even gives him a basis for using Taqiyya against Americans. Obama is actively and aggressively promoting Islam around the planet and especially here at home. The only thing that matches his love of Islam, is his hatred of Israel.

If one is known by who his friends and enemies are, then Obama’s predatory partners and the patriots he persecutes are screaming volumes at us. It’s clear that his campaign of pathological politics and communism is on a set of tracks that leads somewhere we dare not go.

Understanding Modern Martial Law and Dictator Under Obama

Video:  Understanding Modern Martial Law Under Obama

Dr. James David Manning PhD. speaks about the recent Executive order released by Obama referring to it as Martial Law. Recorded 20 March 2012.

Obama Assumes Dictatorial Powers – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

Feeding The Homeless BANNED In Major Cities All Over America

It is getting crazy out there!!

The Economic Collapse Blog

What would you do if you came across someone on the street that had not had anything to eat for several days?  Would you give that person some food?  Well, the next time you get that impulse you might want to check if it is still legal to feed the homeless where you live.  Sadly, feeding the homeless has been banned in major cities all over America.  Other cities that have not banned it outright have put so many requirements on those that want to feed the homeless (acquiring expensive permits, taking food preparation courses, etc.) that feeding the homeless has become “out of reach” for most average people.  Some cities are doing these things because they are concerned about the “health risks” of the food being distributed by ordinary “do-gooders”.  Other cities are passing these laws because they do not want homeless people congregating in city centers where they know that they will be fed.  But at a time when poverty and government dependence are soaring to unprecedented levels, is it really a good idea to ban people from helping those that are hurting?

This is just another example that shows that our country is being taken over by control freaks.  There seems to be this idea out there that it is the job of the government to take care of everyone and that nobody else should even try.

But do we really want to have a nation where you have to get the permission of the government before you do good to your fellow man?

It isn’t as if the government has “rescued” these homeless people.  Homeless shelters all over the nation are turning people away each night because they have no more room.  There are many homeless people that are lucky just to make it through each night alive during the winter.

Sometimes a well-timed sandwich or a cup of warm soup can make a world of difference for a homeless person.  But many U.S. cities have decided that feeding the homeless is such a threat that they had better devote law enforcement resources to making sure that it doesn’t happen.

This is so twisted.  In America today, you need a “permit” to do almost anything.  We are supposed to be a land of liberty and freedom, but these days government bureaucrats have turned our rights into “privileges” that they can revoke at any time.

The following are some of the major U.S. cities that have attempted to ban feeding the homeless….

Philadelphia

Mayor Nutter recently banned feeding homeless people in many parts of Philadelphia where homeless people are known to congregate….

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter has announced a ban on the feeding of large numbers of homeless and hungry people at sites on and near the Benjamin Franklin Parkway.

Mayor Nutter is imposing the ban on all outdoor feedings of large numbers of people on city parkland, including Love Park and the Ben Franklin Parkway, where it is not uncommon for outreach groups to offer free food.

Nutter says the feedings lack both sanitary conditions and dignity.

Orlando

Last June, a group of activists down in Orlando, Florida were arrested by police for feeding the homeless in defiance of a city ordinance….

Over the past week, twelve members of food activist group Food Not Bombs have been arrested in Orlando for giving free food to groups of homeless people in a downtown park. They were acting in defiance of a controversial city ordinance that mandates permits for groups distributing food to large groups in parks within two miles of City Hall. Each group is allowed only two permits per park per year; Food Not Bombs has already exceeded their limit. They set up their meatless buffet in Lake Eola knowing that they would likely be arrested as a result.

Houston

Down in Houston, a group of Christians was recently banned from distributing food to the homeless, and they were told that they probably would not be granted a permit to do so in the future even if they applied for one….

Bobby and Amanda Herring spent more than a year providing food to homeless people in downtown Houston every day. They fed them, left behind no trash and doled out warm meals peacefully without a single crime being committed, Bobby Herring said.

That ended two weeks ago when the city shut down their “Feed a Friend” effort for lack of a permit. And city officials say the couple most likely will not be able to obtain one.

“We don’t really know what they want, we just think that they don’t want us down there feeding people,” said Bobby Herring, a Christian rapper who goes by the stage name Tre9.

Dallas

Dallas has also adopted a law which greatly restricts the ability of individuals and ministries to feed the homeless….

A Dallas-area ministry is suing the city over a food ordinance that restricts the group from giving meals to the homeless.

Courts dismissed Dallas’ request for a summary judgment last week, saying the case, brought up by pastor Don Hart (in video above) may indeed be a violation of free exercise of religion, as protected by the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the blog Religion Clause reported.

In the court filing, the ministry leaders argue that their Christian faith requires them to share meals with the homeless (Jesus did!) and that the requirement that even churches and charities provide toilets, sinks, trained staff and consent of the city keeps them from doing so.

Las Vegas

A few years ago, Las Vegas became the first major U.S. city to specifically pass a law banning the feeding of homeless people….

Las Vegas, whose homeless population has doubled in the past decade to about 12,000 people in and around the city, joins several other cities across the country that have adopted or considered ordinances limiting the distribution of charitable meals in parks. Most have restricted the time and place of such handouts, hoping to discourage homeless people from congregating and, in the view of officials, ruining efforts to beautify downtowns and neighborhoods.

But the Las Vegas ordinance is believed to be the first to explicitly make it an offense to feed “the indigent.”

That law has since been blocked by a federal judge, and since then many U.S. cities have been very careful not to mention “the indigent” or “the homeless” by name in the laws they pass that are intended to ban feeding the homeless.

New York City

New York City has banned all food donations to government-run homeless shelters because the bureaucrats there are concerned that the donated food will not be “nutritious” enough.

Yes, this is really true.

The following is from a recent Fox News article….

The Bloomberg administration is now taking the term “food police” to new depths, blocking food donations to all government-run facilities that serve the city’s homeless.

In conjunction with a mayoral task force and the Health Department, the Department of Homeless Services recently started enforcing new nutritional rules for food served at city shelters. Since DHS can’t assess the nutritional content of donated food, shelters have to turn away good Samaritans.

Can you believe that?

The bureaucrats are officially out of control.

In America today, it seems like almost everything is illegal.

One church down in Louisiana was recently ordered to stop giving out water because it did not have a government permit.

Well, I don’t know about you, but I sure am going to give a cup of cold water to someone if they need it whether I have a permit or not.

It is as if common sense has totally gone out the window in this nation.

Over in New Hampshire, a woman is being sued for planting flowers in her own front yard.

This is the kind of thing that makes me glad that I have moved to a much more rural location.  People in the country tend to be much more relaxed.

Sadly, those that love to micro-manage others continue to get the upper hand in America.  Back in January, 40,000 new laws went into effect all over America.  The politicians continue to hit us with wave after wave of regulations and laws with no end in sight.

All of this is making America a very unpleasant place in which to live.

NO PLACE TO HIDE AFTER THE 2012 ELECTION

This video series presents where we were just five short years ago.

No Place To Hide part 1

http://youtu.be/fIOc2YpxhxI

No Place To Hide part 2

http://youtu.be/WAA59LPuVfE

No Place To Hide part 3

http://youtu.be/qvkr9RxSot4

No Place To Hide part 4

http://youtu.be/LF8_hrpGQpI

The Obama regime and DHS have come a long way since then...

“We Are This Far From A Turnkey Totalitarian State" - Big Brother Goes Live September 2013

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/%E2%80%9Cwe-are-far-turnkey-totalitarian-state-big-brother-goes-live-september-2013

"George Orwell was right. He was just 30 years early.

In its April cover story, Wired has an exclusive report on the NSA's Utah Data Center, which is a must read for anyone who believes any privacy is still a possibility in the United States: "A project of immense secrecy, it is the final piece in a complex puzzle assembled over the past decade. Its purpose: to intercept, decipher, analyze, and store vast swaths of the world’s communications as they zap down from satellites and zip through the underground and undersea cables of international, foreign, and domestic networks.... Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital “pocket litter.”... The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013." In other words, in just over 1 year, virtually anything one communicates through any traceable medium, or any record of one's existence in the electronic medium, which these days is everything, will unofficially be property of the US government to deal with as it sees fit.

The codename of the project: Stellar Wind"... Read more on Stellar Wind Here

An interesting look at Derek Smith; he was the CEO of Choicepoint (as shown in the video). Guess what this globalist is up to these days... global pre-science...

Derek V. Smith

http://geek.net/index.php/about/directors/derek-smith/

Chairman and CEO, Institute of Global Prescience

"Derek Smith is Chairman and CEO of the Institute of Global Prescience, an interdisciplinary non-profit research, education and service organization dedicated to the pursuit of prescience – foreknowledge that anticipates global events and trends that are yet unseen. The Institute seeks to harness the passion of individuals to anticipate issues through clue detection engines that identify inflection points in technological, financial and social systems"...

Smith goes from CEO to futurist

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2009/04/20/story3.html

"At the institute, students are using computer models to study such topics as whether bandwidth will be able to keep up with the growth of data flow and when the United States might elect its first atheist president.

Other topics include the future of cell phones, obesity, how attitudes will affect climate change and when the world will run out of oil"...

Take a look at the Institute of Global Prescience Board of Directors HERE. (http://www.prescienceintl.com/cti_ab.html) Notice the Federal and state government connections:

à Amy Zimpfer, Regional Deputy Director, EPA

à Anthony Eggert, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of the Chair California Air Resources Board

à Jeffrey Byron, Commissioner, CEC

à Paul Douglas, Supervisor, Renewable Procurement and Resource Planning, California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)

à Trina Martynowicz, Clean Air Emerging Technologies and West Coast Collaborative, Clean Energy and Climate Change Office, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Google and PG&E (think ‘SMART Meters’) are also represented.

The Institute of Global Prescience is but one of many, many non-profits, NGO’s and individuals seeking to destroy our country from within.

Is it the intention of American tax-payers to have their hard earned dollars spent on the development of a turnkey Totalitarian State? Do we support massive government spending on programs that are in direct violation of our right to privacy under the 4^th Amendment? Do Americans understand that current elected officials are facilitating and funding these endeavors with our tax dollars? Will enough Americans wake up, organize and vote the career politicians out of office in November?

The real revolution must take place at the ballot box. Until enough of us can vote against the career politicians who are aiding and abetting the overthrow of our Constitutional Republic, we will have no place to hide once they turn that key. What you do for the 2012 election will determine our fate and that of future generations.

By AJ - h/t to MJ

**We all know that Big Brother is watching us 24/7 with cameras almost everywhere and through our TV cable box and the GPS system in your car, but today on Fox, Shep Smith pointed out and discussed with Judge Napolitano that Panetta and the CIA verified that they can also monitor us through our refrigerator, microwaves and other appliances.  (Have not been able to find the video yet, but check back later).

HR 347 Just Passed Without Notice - US "Trespass Bill" will make protest illegal

‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

This is absolute tyranny.  No doubt about it.  Makes it easy to do roundups and protects their butts (now they're all Kings) by stomping all over us.  Even in little ways... think of Town Hall meetings... being carted away for asking a question the Congress Member doesn't like.  You Betcha!

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, 02.27.12, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011.  Hmmmm…

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance."

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.

Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal.”

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.

Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.

Related:

HR 347  -  Thomas.loc.gov  -  This is pre-emptive law – all dissent..freedom of speech

HR 347 just passed - is this real?

National Responder Support Camp (NRSC)

Solicitation Number: HSFE70-12-R-0033

The House passed bill H.R. 347. A bill that makes it illegal to protest ...

(HR 347)  -  http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20120227/BILLS-112hr347-SUS.pdf

H.R. 347: Goodbye, First Amendment: 'Trespass Bill' will make ...

Alerts

Obama Fights to Retain Warrantless Wiretapping: Despite being propelled to victory by progressive supporters critical of the Bush administration’s record on civil liberties, President Barack Obama has directed the Justice Department to defend many of the policies of George W. Bush, including warrantless wiretapping. Last week, the Justice Department filed papers asking the Supreme Court to overturn an appeals court ruling that allowed the continuation of an ACLU lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a 2008 law giving the government unprecedented authority to monitor Americans’ international emails and phone calls. AllGov -  more

Homeland Security Lied to Congress About Spying on US Citizens: All this is happening under the Obama administration, yet those who complained about Bush listening to known terrorist associates are no longer screaming bloody murder because it’s their guy who is running the show. Yes, the Department of Homeland Security has been caught in a lie. They are monitoring US citizens, including journalists, who oppose Obama’s agenda (or use certain words) with the assistance of Facebook, Twitter and other forms of social media. DHS, under the Obama regime, believes US citizens are the enemy. more

It’s Time to Accept Reality That It’s Too Late: It is too late to save your neighbor. It is too late to save your friend. It is too late to save a family member who will not listen or believes in the power of a global solution. It is too late to plan for a world of freedom and individualism. Atlas is shrugging, yet nobody cares. The power of the people is now the rule of law. Sadly the “people” who are in control are neither those of the Founders or of God. Prepare accordingly. more

The Culture and Mindset of FEMA and Emergency Responders: An Inside Look: I recently had the privilege to interview a highly credible inside source who has worked in the emergency response field for many years. He has been to dozens of trainings over the years. As an insider, he has been to many FEMA training centers, and has access to highly classified information. What my anonymous source shared with me about the culture and mindset of the emergency responder community was very alarming. I will give you a couple of quotes to get started: more

Steve Quayle Program Note: Steve and Greg Evensen guest on Omega Man Radio in a 3-hr program Thurs. March 1; 6p.m. PST / 7p.m. MTN / 8p.m. CST / 9p.m. EST. Topic: Catastrophic Upheaval In All Realms Is Now In Motion-The Coming Slaughter. Listen Live / Chat. Call In: 1-917-889-2745.

Related:

US “Trespass Bill” will make protest illegal 

Utah asks for repeal of NDAA’s indefinite detention provisions

We should always choose liberty over tyranny and freedom over security. As Benjamin Franklin said, “He who chooses security over liberty, rarely gets (or deserves) either.” We aren’t even paying attention.