Obama Plans Attack On First Amendment if Re-elected


Obama Plans Attack On First Amendment

if Re-elected

English: Barack Obama delivers a speech at the...

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 15, 2012

Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axerlrod, announced earlier this week that the administration will push for a constitutional amendment to rollback free speech if his boss is re-elected in November.

“When we win, we will use whatever tools out there, including a constitutional amendment, to turn this back,” Axlerod said on Wednesday. “I understand the free speech argument, but when the Koch brothers can spend $400 million, more than the McCain campaign and the Republican Party spent last time, that’s very concerning.”

“This has never been done before — in 235 years — to make it possible for the government to control political speech in this country — a truly radical, astonishing thing to say out loud even if you believed it,” remarked Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Thursday.

(more…)

About these ads

New York Bill Outlaws Internet Political Speech


New York Bill Outlaws Internet Political Speech

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
May 23, 2012

Jim Conte, a New York Republican, has declared himself an enemy of the First Amendment and the Constitution. He is pushing the so-called Internet Protection Act, legislation that would make it illegal to post anonymously on the internet under the guise of protecting children who are victims of “cyber bullying.”

State Republican Senator Tom O’Mara introduced the legislation on May 3.

In addition to banning bully speech and speech critical of business, Conte’s bill will make it a crime to post “mean-spirited and baseless political attacks.” If passed, the legislation will produce a massive chilling effect on political speech in the state.

New York state government is attempting to pass the measure in both the Senate and the Assembly. The legislation has been referred to the Codes Committee in the Senate, and the Government Operations Committee in the Assembly.

Both proposals are identical and would effect messages posted on message boards, blogs, social networks, and “any other discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages.” The law would require websites to post email addresses for “removal requests, clearly visible in any sections where comments are posted.” Those demanding the removal of content they find objectionable, however, would have their anonymity protected.

(more…)

Court Strikes Blow To Illinois Eavesdropping Law


Court Strikes Blow To Illinois Eavesdropping Law

 

Seal of the United States Court of Appeals for...

 

 

 

By JASON KEYSER  - Associated Press

 

Published Tuesday, May 8, 2012

 

CHICAGO — In a blow to Illinois’ sweeping eavesdropping law, a federal appeals court on Tuesday blocked its enforcement in cases where someone is recording a police officer at work.

 

It was a victory for activists who had feared that using smartphones or video cameras to record police responding to demonstrations during this month’s NATO summit in Chicago could land protesters and bloggers behind bars for years. It’s also the most serious legal challenge to the measure — one of the strictest in the nation — and adds momentum to efforts by some state lawmakers to overhaul the legislation, whose constitutionality has been questioned.

 

The law, enacted in 1961, makes it a felony for someone to produce an audio recording of a conversation unless all parties agree. It sets a maximum punishment of 15 years in prison if a law enforcement officer is recorded.

 

In a separate decision late last month, the city of Chicago‘s chief legal officer said police did not intend to enforce the law during the May 20-21 summit, but Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez had not given similar assurances. Tuesday’s temporary injunction put summit protesters in the clear.

(more…)

Democrats Push for Constitutional Amendment to Roll Back First Amendment


Democrats Push for Constitutional Amendment to Roll Back First Amendment

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
April 20, 2012

photo

Rep. Jim McGovern (right) wants to limit the First Amendment.

Nancy Pelosi’s tirade against the First Amendment coincides with an effort by Free Speech for People to push a “People’s Rights Amendment” it wants added to the Constitution. The amendment reads as follows:

Section 1.  We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons.

Section 2.  People, person, or persons as used in this Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected state and federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.

Section 3.  Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people’s rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, and such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.

(more…)

Cop Arrests NBC Reporters, Says “Your First Amendment Right Can Be Terminated”


Cop Arrests NBC Reporters, Says “Your First Amendment Right Can Be Terminated”

“I don’t care about no damn lawsuit” officer yells at media

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
March 19, 2012


Two NBC journalists were handcuffed and threatened by Chicago police after attempting to report on the murder of a 6-year-old girl yesterday, NBC Chicago reports.

Another NBC journalist was also detained by police outside Mt. Sinai Hospital, where the girl had been taken following a fatal shooting during city wide violence over the weekend.

Police were called to the hospital shortly after reporters arrived on the scene. The journalists said they has already moved away from a public sidewalk and across the street at the request of the police.

One police officer was then caught on camera telling other members of the media “Your First Amendment right can be terminated if you’re creating a scene or whatever. Your First Amendment right has got limitations.”

When the reporters asked for clarification on how they were creating a scene, the officer replied, “Your presence is creating a scene.”

“This is what we do for a living!” one reporter replied, before another added“You’ve got a lawsuit coming.”

“I don’t care about no damn lawsuit!” the officer fired back. “F*ck a lawsuit. Just ’cause you sue doesn’t mean you’re going to win.”

Photographer Donte Williams and WGN Reporter Dan Ponce were then handcuffed and briefly detained by the officer, who threatened them with trespassing charges.

Full story

H.R. 347: Another Step in the Elimination of the First Amendment


H.R. 347: Another Step in the Elimination of the First Amendment

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 5, 2012

It is fairly obvious Obama and Congress rushed through H.R. 347 in order to curtail demonstrations that will undoubtedly occur during both Democrat and Republican conventions this summer. Also known as the “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011,” the bill makes it a felony to disrupt or protest at any place or event attended by any person with secret service protection.

photo

“Current law makes it illegal to enter or remain in an area where certain government officials (more particularly, those with Secret Service protection) will be visiting temporarily if and only if the person knows it’s illegal to enter the restricted area but does so anyway,” Michigan Rep.Justin Amash wrote on his Facebook page. “[H.R. 347] 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.”

Amash, Paul Broun, a Georgia Republican, and Ron Paul were the lone dissenting voices opposed to this bill, which is being called  the “First Amendment Rights Eradication Act” designed specifically to counter the Occupy movement and other political groups opposed to the bankster regime in control of the Congress and the presidency. Democrats have characterized opposition to the bill as “a whole lot of kerfuffle over nothing.”

Gene Howington, a guest blogger on law professor Jonathan Turley’s blog, contends that the government deliberately made the language of H.R. 347 vague and overly broad. Howington writes that “it seems to be a trend that vague or overly broad language could be fairly described as being purposefully adopted allowing ‘wiggle room’ for Federal authorities to potentially abuse civil and human rights under the color of authority.”

(more…)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 495 other followers

%d bloggers like this: