ATS Shut Down? HR 1955 Bill Could , page 1

+3 more
posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 10:58 AM

link

HR 1955 Bill

On Oct. 23 HR 1955 the "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" was passed by the House with 404 members voting in favor of this blatantly unconstitutional bill. - Ron Paul

en.wikipedia.org...

One is the perceived overly broad and vague definitions of "force", “home grown terrorism” and “violent radicalization” (section 899A). Critics charge that the vagueness in these definitions would permit the government to classify many types of venerated American political activity, such as civil disobedience, as terrorism. Critics frequently cite Section 899A which reads, in part: "The use, planned use, or threatened use, of force ...to coerce the ..government, (or) civilian population ..in furtherance of political or social objectives",[17] as particularly problematic. They argue that major societal reforms which are now accepted but were perceived at the time as threatening to the government, such as civil rights, suffrage, and others, would be classified as terrorism.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

If this bill or similar bill passes ATS will be history in a very short time.

This bill is a complete infringement on the 1st amendment.

People need to watch these videos to understand what I am speaking about.

Maybe I am reading into this to much but everyone on ATS needs to see the vids and come up with there own conclusion and comments.

Thanks

www.dailypaul.com...

[edit on 25-3-2008 by Realtruth]

dave420

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:23 AM

link

Is it a law against people spouting baseless theories about why a certain rock on a Mars photo is actually a Bigfoot/Grey/David Icke hybrid?

Because if not, I don't think we have anything to worry about.

Realtruth

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:30 AM

link

Originally posted by dave420
Is it a law against people spouting baseless theories about why a certain rock on a Mars photo is actually a Bigfoot/Grey/David Icke hybrid?

Because if not, I don't think we have anything to worry about.

First, It is not a law it is a bill.

Second, it has very little to do with people spouting baseless theories, but an infringement on the USA Constitution and the 1st amendment.

ro01xc08

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:36 AM

link

Just move the ATS servers outside of the US. It would be interesting to see them shut down a non US based website. Just need to check if abovetopsecret has been registered in other domains. We'd just have to remind them that US law only extends as far as US borders.

Its nice to see they are proposing laws that go against free speech, and the constitution, and even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

I'd love to see what theories would sprout up if this site was shut down... there would be many saying "I was right about (insert crazy thing) and they shut it down to silence us!!!11one!!eleventy" This site does have some very informative threads, but some are just pure crazy.... That's why I keep coming back

[edit on 25/3/08 by ro01xc08]

Realtruth

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:39 AM

link

reply to post by ro01xc08

They could move the servers, but it not just ATS but millions of sights and groups that would be effected. This is worse than the "Patriot Act" IMO.

They could force blocks of IP's, sites, and more.

Just look at the wording of this bill, very very vague and can be twisted any way they want.

[edit on 25-3-2008 by Realtruth]

DimensionalDetective

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 03:33 PM

link

STARRED...FLAGGED

This is PRECISELY the type of things that the sleeping populace better be aware and alarmed of...

This fits right in with the Pentagon's spewing of "The Internet should be treated as an Enemy Weapons System".

Information and awareness is the enemy to these rulers.

Great thread realtruth---I hope people are paying attention!

daddyroo45

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:16 PM

link

Every concerned citizen needs to write their Senator as soon as possible,reguarding this bill HR 1955.It will come before the Senate very soon ,probably under a different number. There has to be safeguards put in place to avoid anyone loosing any civil rights.

The people hold the keys to the house and senate.Remind them!!!

Cham Zord

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:23 PM

link

To be honest, I don't think protesting this bill will do any good. If the powers that be have already made up their minds, then that's the way they're gonna vote. Besides, even if it passes, it'd still be difficult for them to take down such a high-profile website without a heavy amount of attention being drawn. When push comes to shove, history has shown that the people WILL fight back. (American Revolution anyone?)

daddyroo45

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:28 PM

link

Why revolt when the job can be done without any physical damage.If enough people contact their Senators this bill will die a quick death.

It's simple they want to keep those cushy jobs in washington.If they don't vote the way the majority says to,vote them out!

Realtruth

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:28 PM

link

reply to post by Cham Zord

That is this entire point. Why fight? when unconstitutional bills and laws can be averted before hand.

Revolutions are pointless.

The only people that win or profit in war are the people that supply the idiots fighting, otherwise it is just degrees of loss.

I agree if the power that be want a bill passed then they can do it, but if the masses weigh in before it's passed, it's easier then if the bill becomes law.

[edit on 25-3-2008 by Realtruth]

Cham Zord

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:34 PM

link

reply to post by Realtruth

I'm not saying that people shouldn't protest this bill if they don't agree with it. If anything, they should protest it, since they have a right to be heard. I don't agree with this bill in the slightest, but I'm saying that most politicians will turn a blind eye to it and supply some superfluous response such as "That's what makes this free country so beautiful; that the people have the power to express themselves over an issue that they feel strongly against. However, we feel that this bill is valuable to the safety of the general public and, therefore, we have made the decision to pass it." They'd just shrug it off.

daddyroo45

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:47 PM

link

reply to post by Cham Zord

They can only shrug it off for so long.They weigh the numbers of responses they receive.When the numbers overwhelm their line of thought they MUST respond.Elected officals fear grassroot support more than anything.Reelection is their goal,they cannot acheive it when they don't vote the will of the people.

interestedalways

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:07 PM

link

Originally posted by dave420
Is it a law against people spouting baseless theories about why a certain rock on a Mars photo is actually a Bigfoot/Grey/David Icke hybrid?

Because if not, I don't think we have anything to worry about.

Why should there be a law about people spouting basesless theories?

One person's baseless theory could be the next Truth.

All the great revolutions in understanding have sprouted in a theory and if plausible may grow into an evolved belief.

On the other hand it could be total bs, but there shouldn't be laws against expression of creativity, regardless of the absurdity.

GAOTU789

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:10 PM

link

There are some real good threads on ATS about this bill already.

Here's a couple of the better ones for you all to have a look at.

House passes Thought Crime Bill

Thinking for Yourself is Now a Crime--must read for ATS'ers

Some rather scary stuff when you think about it. The vagueness of the bill could make anything that lawmakers consider subversive a crime.

Write your representatives and let them know what your feelings are about this bill. You do still have a voice and with elections coming soon in America, now is a good time to make your concerns known. The people managed to get the Immigration Amnesty stopped, it can work with this.

edited to add after reading Crakeur's remark; SO's comments are on one of those two threads. I forget which but they are both worth reading.

[edit on 25-3-2008 by GAOTU789]

Crakeur

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:11 PM

link

There was another thread where S.O. stated that we'd move the servers to Canada if there was ever an issue of the US Gov't having the right to shut us down over the content on the site.

interestedalways

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:15 PM

link

Thanks for the heads up on the other threads.

I will definitely read them both.

Things are being implemented so fast my head is spinning!

Realtruth

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:30 PM

link

reply to post by GAOTU789

Thanks for posting those links. I have already written my letter and it will go out tomorrow morning.

It appears they are really trying to control everything that is said and written. I think the internet is really making them nervous and this is the law that can make the free internet in the US go bye-bye.

Realtruth

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:35 PM

link

Originally posted by Crakeur
There was another thread where S.O. stated that we'd move the servers to Canada if there was ever an issue of the US Gov't having the right to shut us down over the content on the site.

knock on wood, twice.

If it ever came down to shutting ATS down we, in the USA, would be in some major trouble.

We have so many laws in place now why not enforce those?

Patriot Act is not enough?

Let's see how we can take away the right to free speech, hmmmmm?

HR 155 Bill will do it.

interestedalways

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 06:26 PM

link

As far as moving the servers to Canada what if we become NorthAmericanUnion. What good would it have done to move them there?

citizen truth

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 06:35 PM

link

There was another thread where S.O. stated that we'd move the servers to Canada if there was ever an issue of the US Gov't having the right to shut us down over the content on the site.

I'm sure you would be welcome here until the U.S. bullies our lame leader into following along.If the S.P.P actually comes into play then ATS might have to find a country that doesn't care what Herr Shrub says.
I can't see Canadians standing for it,and we can be very vocal.

So now people can be labeled a "terrist" because they don't like the leader?Isn't that similar to what "communist" and "fascist" countries do?

In the end,these scumbags are people.I never place anyone on a pedestal because I bow to nobody.