Showing posts with label freedom of Assembly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom of Assembly. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Stand Up For Religious Freedom Nationwide Rallies Friday - Coalition to Stop the HHS Mandate

Stand Up For Religious Freedom Nationwide Rallies Friday

Coalition to Stop the HHS Mandate ^ | 3/10?/12 | Coalition to Stop the HHS Mandate  -  Cross-Posted by John Jansen (March 20, 2012 at 2:05 pm)  -  h/t to MJ

HHS Mandate News and Rally Updates

Notable Speakers to Address March 23 Rallies

microphoneIn addition to the 15 Catholic bishops scheduled to speak at Nationwide Rally for Religious Freedom locations, countless other influential speakers from all walks of life will also be addressing rallies throughout the country this Friday, March 23.

The speakers at the more than 130 Rally sites represent a wide array of backgrounds and professions, including members of Congress, physicians, college presidents, pastors, radio hosts, law professors, heads of organizations, publishers, religious sisters, pregnancy resource directors, and rabbis.

The New York City Rally will feature several big names, including Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and pastoral associate of Priests for Life; Fr. Benedict Groeschel, Msgr. Philip Reilly, and Mother Mary Agnes Donovan, Superior General of the Sisters of Life.

Rabbi Yehuda Levin, Father Paul Schenck, Rev. Rob Schenck, and the Family Research Council’s Cathy Ruse will address the Rally outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia.

In addition to the Bishop David Choby, the Nashville Rally will feature Rep. Diane Black (R-TN) and Dr. Richard Land, President of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Liberty Commission.

The Chicago Rally will feature Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL); Mary FioRito, Executive Assistant to the Archbishop, Archdiocese of Chicago; and Joe Morris, Past President of B’nai B’rith in the Midwest.

Moving over to the West Coast, the San Francisco Rally will feature Reggie Littlejohn of Women’s Rights without Frontiers, Fr. Joseph Fessio, SJ of Ignatius Press, and Kevin McGary, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation of California.

These are just a few of the hundreds of speakers who will be addressing enthusiastic crowds at Rally sites across the country this Friday, March 23. You won’t want to miss it!

Find the Rally location nearest you here.

Friday, March 16, 2012

‘If You’re Right Wing, You’re a Hate Group’

Southern Poverty Law Center sign SC1 225x300 ‘If You’re Right Wing, You’re a Hate Group’

Photo Credit: Stretchy Bill Creative Commons

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is in the business to raise money. In order to do this, they must extend the definition of what it means to be a “hate group.” It’s similar to the phrase “One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter.” It all depends on who’s defining the terms.

Each year the SPLC issues a report on hate groups in America. Each year the list gets longer. “Last week, the group released its latest intelligence report, titled ‘The Patriot Movement Explodes.’ The listing includes the Tenth Amendment Center, Oath Keepers and WND.”

The SPLC has gone from tracking the movements of violent racists, skinhead groups, and a brief resurgence of the KKK that number in the hundreds to creating hysteria over mainstream value voters. If you believe in the Tenth Amendment, you must be part of a hate group. If you say President Obama is wrong on this or that issue, then you must be responding out of racial hatred. Am I exaggerating? You be the judge from this report by Jack Minor at WND:

Mark Potek, senior fellow with the SPLC and editor of the report, said the growth of what is described as the radical right was fueled by “economic dislocation, a proliferation of demonizing conspiracy theories, the changing racial makeup of America, and the prospect of four more years under a black president who many on the far right view as an enemy to their country.”

With its new definition of what constitutes a hate group, the SPLC has become a fund-raising machine. It’s no wonder that the SPLC is flush with cash.[1] Ultimately, the tactic is to strike fear in middle-America so the checks keep rolling in. Most communities don’t see skinheads or even KKKers, so the SPLC needs new visible enemies.

According to the SPLC, hate has gone mainstream, so you better send a donation before these “haters” come and get you, too! The SPLC is a fund raising industry designed to silence conservatives who want their country back, to hold elected officials accountable to their Constitutional oath, and to uphold certain moral values. There’s not much money in fighting real hate groups now that only a few of the real haters are still around, so the SPLC needs a bigger, more menacing group of haters — your next door neighbors who attend the church down the street! Muslim extremists who kill soldiers in the name of Allah on an army base or plan to blow up the streets of New York City to kill and maim Americans are of little concern when there are bigger fish to land.

h/t to Western Journalism  -   Read More at godfatherpolitics.com

Thursday, March 1, 2012

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…

Washington: US park police detains a Christian religious activist during a pro-life demonstration in front of the White House in Washington on February 16, 2012. (AFP Photo/Jewel Samad)

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. AllGovmore

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  Listen to this article. Powered by Odiogo.com

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.

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

WASHINGTON: STIFLING FREEDOM OF PROTEST

When we met with the Park Service on November 4th, they mentioned that the Government was going to start cutting back on LARGE PROTEST gatherings in Washington starting in 2011. Reason? The Secretary of the Interior "wants grass on the Mall year-round."

At the time, I thought how unbelievable this statement was... we are GUARANTEED this FREEDOM OF SPEECH in the Constitution! It is our RIGHT!

Now today on Glenn Beck, he mentioned exactly the same thing. One by one, our freedoms are being abolished. Pretty soon one lone Conservative will appear on TV's worldwide with a giant tank staring the lone figure down...sound familiar?

The big question is: How much more do they do to us before this gets really ugly? I'm thinking it's coming like a freight train.

Finally, if you have not seen Erica's post on using the Democratic party's own site against them please do! They lay out media outlets near you and allow you to send a note--the note is supposed to be in favor of the healthcare bill; however, we can use their system for exactly the OPPOSITE! See her post & PLEASE send the media outlets your note TODAY!

Added by M.O.M. Admin on November 23, 2009 at 2:36pm

While we are speaking of commoners… Uppity Elitist Martha Stuart was seen in an interview belittling Sarah Palin spewing the usual liberal pabulum: “Sarah is scary, dumb, confused blah blah blah. Well if that is what she thinks of us the common idiots who buy her stuff… perhaps we should stop. I propose a boycott of all things Martha Stuart.

I also propose of boycott of Mattel Toys until they stop producing the new Barbie wearing a Burkka!!

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Community Organizer In Chief Suddenly Silences Free Speech

Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Now they are its fiercest opponents. foxnews_190x107AP

Once upon a time our president wasn't always down on dissent. After all, he was a community organizer way before he ever became a politician.

"Go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face," Senator Obama told his supporters on the campaign trail in fall of 2008.

So I suppose he was for bickering before he was against it?

The left has always loved community organizing-when it's their interest. Heck, they are being lead by an expert in the field. But when regular folks gather to express unhappiness in the form of a dissenting opinion to their progressive agenda, they despise it, delegitimize it and seek to stop it all costs. Grassroots are bad when the roots aren't firmly planted in the liberal ground. Apparently bills in Congress aren't the only thing Democrats haven't read in a while -- how about the Constitution? Remember that? Isn't this enshrined in the Constitution -- freedom of Assembly? Isn't this one of the foundations of our democracy, organizing, getting like-minded people with the same views to come together, whether they're in Birkenstocks or Brooks Brothers? Last time I looked there was nothing "manufactured" about organizing for or against a cause.

The White House has called the uproar at recent town halls on health care "manufactured outrage." Senator Harry Reid calls the concerned citizens speaking their minds "loud, shrill voices." Nancy Pelosi called protesters Nazis, who are "carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on health care." There is no evidence on this whatsoever.

And Senator Barbara Senator Boxer Senator (not to be outdone on insanity by Speaker Pelosi) has objected to the dress code of protesters. (Did I mention she was a Senator??) She claims they're "too well dressed" to be legit. You just can't have a real protest without some tie dye, marijuana and a flaming brassiere, huh.

Ma'am, this is what people with jobs look like. I guess one needs to strip to his or her tighty whities to be taken seriously.

But the polling discredits their charges. According to a recent Quinnipiac poll, on Obama's effort to overhaul of the health-care system, 52 percent disapprove of his handling of the issue while 39 percent approve. Disapproval jumped 10 points in the last month alone, and 60 percent of Independents - a key voting block - disapprove of the plan. Bottom line: the outrage is real.

Despite the legitimacy of the public's concern, demonizing democracy has become pretty common these days for the left. They wrote off the tea parties as fabricated and claimed they were funded by FOX News . Most of the mainstream media took their cue from them and refused to report on the gatherings. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" on broadcasters in order to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. And the administration has already tried to label anyone who speaks up as a "radical right wing extremist."

By dismissing the anger of conservatives, moderates, libertarians, conservative democrats and independents the administration looks out of touch and appallingly arrogant. In fact, it will hurt them even more because Obama promised to listen to the concerns of the citizens, not operate with a tin ear.

Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Now they are its fiercest opponents. In case they have forgotten, the root of the word "democrat" means power to the people. That means ALL people. Even when they aren't wearing tie dye.

By: Andrea Tantaros - a conservative commentator and columnist for FOXNews.com. Read more from Andrea at www.andreatantaros.com.

Who Knew Phase 1 of Fairness Doctrine (censorship) was going to be called Michael JacksonWho Knew That Phase I of the Fairness Doctrine Was Going to be Called Michael Jackson?

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

Cynthia Tucker: Town Hall Protesters Are Racists

See Video: Cynthia Tucker: Town Hall Protesters Are Racists | The FOX Nation

Wow… when all else fails, yell racism. I have never heard single person oppose healthcare because of racism or dislike Obama because they are racists. And to resort to using the race card when people don’t like your policies really is a low blow! Obviously Cynthia Tucker and Paul Krugman are the ones obsessed with race!

Are you opposed to ObamaCare? Willing to attend a town hall to express your disapproval? Odds are good you're a racist. Just ask Cynthia Tucker. As Clay Waters has noted, Paul Krugman alleges that racist motives are at the heart of the town hall protests against ObamaCare. On this evening's Hardball, Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution was willing to get specific, estimating that "45 to 65%" of the protesters are motivated by racism.

Related Resources: