Bill Gives Attorney General Power To Designate Gun Owners, Tax Protesters As Terrorists

reply to post by GorehoundLarry


You're missing the point, which Infowars correctly points out for us:

The bill is ostensibly aimed at preventing race “extremists” and gang members from joining the Army, but since the Army already hires felons, criminals, racists and gang members, the real purpose behind the legislation is to codify the move to label gun owners, “anti-government” activists and tax protesters as domestic terrorists, a process that has been ongoing since at least the start of the decade.

The powers are sweeping and broad.

The AG will have the power to designate ANY anti-big government group as a hate group.

It will prevent members of small government groups such as "campaign for liberty" or tea party groups from admission into our armed forces.

Right now, most of the armed forces is composed of freedom loving southerners.

They are fixing to change that, this is just the first step.

Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ)

“While the amendment seeks to keep gang members and members of violent groups out of the military, the amendment by its language is much more broad. Specifically, it confers upon the Attorney General the ability to categorize groups as hate groups, and this sounds an alarm for many of us because of the recent shocking and offensive report released by the Department of Homeland Security which labeled, arguably, a majority of Americans as “extremists,” warned Franks.

“I take extreme offense that the federal government — through a report issued under the authority of a Cabinet-level official — would dare to categorize people who are “dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition or abortion or immigration” as “right-wing extremists” and it begs the question of whether the Attorney General, under Mr. Hastings’ Amendment, can look to the Napolitano report to decide who is an extremist, or can make the same categorization of the majority of Americans as extremists who may then be kept from joining the military, or who may be discharged,” said Rep. Franks.

Remember, being labeled a member of an extremist group under the Patriot Act now places you in the federal governments line of fire as it pertains to the war on terror.

Its essentially granting the power to the AG to label Americans as terrorists.



[edit on 7-7-2009 by mnemeth1]

Oh I get it, read between the lines.

Alright, well, I'm glad this bill is trying to be stopped. Allowing more racist extremists in the military is superb.

Until gun owners and protestors are charged with treason or hate crimes, I'm not really convinced.

And remember, infowars.com isn't the best site to get information from...

that's like relying on Fox News lol

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Oh I get it, read between the lines.

Alright, well, I'm glad this bill is trying to be stopped. Allowing more racist extremists in the military is superb.

Until gun owners and protestors are charged with treason or hate crimes, I'm not really convinced.

And remember, infowars.com isn't the best site to get information from...

that's like relying on Fox News lol

So you're against members of the military exercising their first amendment rights?

And the information is coming directly from the House's web site, Infowars is simply commenting on it. I posted a link to the amendment in the first post.

The military already has rules of conduct.

This amendment has nothing to do with keeping "haters" out of the military.




[edit on 7-7-2009 by mnemeth1]

Okay so according to this all ats members are a hate group. Even discussing if there will be a confrontation be it citizen vs gov't, or any other group puts you on the list. But by the wording of the bill,we could use it against Obama since he belonged to a church that spat out the required verbal "crime". This bill is a tool to go after perceived enemies and get the sheeple to think it's alright. It sounds good on paper [not really] but it seems a little to subjective. Do you think REV. Wright would be placed on this kind of list? He meets the requirements!

Originally posted by hangedman13
Okay so according to this all ats members are a hate group. Even discussing if there will be a confrontation be it citizen vs gov't, or any other group puts you on the list. But by the wording of the bill,we could use it against Obama since he belonged to a church that spat out the required verbal "crime".

This bill is a tool to go after perceived enemies and get the sheeple to think it's alright. It sounds good on paper [not really] but it seems a little to subjective. Do you think REV. Wright would be placed on this kind of list? He meets the requirements!

That's right.

The AG decides.

Giving one man subjective authority to label groups he dislikes as "hate" groups and then banning their members from public service is CRAZY.

The consequences of this can not be understated.

Public servants are already governed by RULES OF CONDUCT.

Not to mention such actions can lead to violations of civil liberties under the Patriot Act. If you are a member of Campaign for Liberty and the AG decides that is a hate group, the federal government would have the authority to exercise anti-terrorist measures against you removing all of your constitutional protections.



[edit on 7-7-2009 by mnemeth1]

If you consider racism a part of the first amendment, go for it.

But like I said, I just don't find all this very convincing....that's just my input. I get it, they want to remove our rights. Obama wants to destroy America. Rush Limbaugh said the same thing and Glenn Beck says it EVERY day. So where's the action?

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
If you consider racism a part of the first amendment, go for it.

But like I said, I just don't find all this very convincing....that's just my input. I get it, they want to remove our rights. Obama wants to destroy America. Rush Limbaugh said the same thing and Glenn Beck says it EVERY day. So where's the action?

I don't "consider" racism to be covered under the first amendment, it IS covered under the first amendment.

However keeping racists out of the military is not what this bill is about.

The military is ALREADY governed by rules of conduct.

If a member of the military engages in racist behavior, they will be punished severely and quickly.

This bill is a front for codifying the ability of the AG to label anti-government groups as terrorists.

That is its sole purpose.

This is pretty bold... I wonder how they feel about combat vet, gun owning, speakers at tax protests with tattoos of their firearms beneath a patriotic slogan?

Yup, sign me up too...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3483eda14df0.jpg[/atsimg]

Then again, if they think they'll take me without a fight to my last breath... See above.

Notice to mindless drones of the NWO: I mean what I say. Y'all can check out the picture, and heed the "warning", or you can see those words and that 1911 in action.

Your choice lads.

[edit on 7/7/09 by cbianchi513]

That shows you how outdated the constitution is obviously....we all know and can agree that racism isn't the most...civilized manner of our species. It has no part anywhere in our society. And it shouldn't be allowed in our military. Especially when we go into an Islamic nation. We wonder why torture and rape takes place. Racism needs to be removed.

And we know how flawed the military is anyway. Considering the whole gays in the military situation, which Obama fails to acknowledge.

I get it, this bill to keep racists out of the military actually has Nothing to do with...racism or hate in the military. Everything is about Us, everything has to be about sending us to FEMA camps or removing our rights. No bill can ever be about anything else.

We'll see where this bill takes us. I'm betting on: Nowhere bad.

Are we losing our rights and freedom? To an extent. However, this has been happening for years. I just get sick of people claiming it's all Obama who started this.

Did you know that if you own an adult film business or company, and you distribute your film to a state that allows pornography and has no laws regarding to pornography, it's alright. It's fine. Perfectly Legal. However! If that DVD or video or item passes through a state with laws that prohibit such material, you and your company will be fined or you could probably end up behind bars.

Max Hardcore, a pornographer is still in prison because his films were considered obscene. Extreme Associates, a pornographic company ended up in court because their material was deemed obscene. Who makes you a judge to deem something obscene that others find arousing and entertaining?

If you ask me, we've always been losing rights one way or another. If this bill is what you say it is, then it's no surprise.

[edit on 7-7-2009 by GorehoundLarry]

reply to post by cbianchi513


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/323903710d66.jpg[/atsimg]

You are clearly a threat to the government and should be locked up in a FEMA camp for the federal governments protection.

Never mind you served honorably and swore an oath to defend the country against domestic and foreign tyranny.



[edit on 7-7-2009 by mnemeth1]

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
That shows you how outdated the constitution is obviously....we all know and can agree that racism isn't the most...civilized manner of our species. It has no part anywhere in our society. And it shouldn't be allowed in our military. Especially when we go into an Islamic nation. We wonder why torture and rape takes place. Racism needs to be removed.

And we know how flawed the military is anyway. Considering the whole gays in the military situation, which Obama fails to acknowledge.

I get it, this bill to keep racists out of the military actually has Nothing to do with...racism or hate in the military. Everything is about Us, everything has to be about sending us to FEMA camps or removing our rights. No bill can ever be about anything else.

We'll see where this bill takes us. I'm betting on: Nowhere bad.

The constitution is out-dated?

You know, we have this thing called an amendment process where by we can change it if need be.

Of course, our federal over-lords can't be bothered with such inconvinences.

I believe the only thing that is out-dated is the federal reserve and our bankrupt government that is running roughshod over American's liberties.

We wouldn't have any of the problems we have today if the government was forced to stay inside its constitutional box.

I just received a call from the NRA warning of this abomination.

If their idea is to prevent some sort of "revolution," then something like this just may kick it off.

The insanity in Washington is rampant.

I don't know if there's some hallucinogenic gas seeping up from the ground there, or if it's in the water, but this place has gone completely mad.

The problem now is too much power in the hands of too few, and this is only going to consolidate too much power in the hands of one man.

By the law of the Constitution, this in of itself is treason.

Damn.

reply to post by mnemeth1


Crap! I didn't know they could take my picture through the computer!!!


Yeah, that's me alright... I swear it is.

At least we can still laugh, sometimes.

o snap!

that means that we all go down if this thing comes to pass, ESPECIALLY those of you who say crap like, "I CANT WAIT FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO FALL". you are going down hard if this comes to fruition.

im getting the F out of dodge before you guys bring me down with you!

can we still read? or do we need to participate in order to get into trouble??

not trying to look like a sell out on the conspiracy chain, but for realz. #s getting serious now. lata

I say the piece of excrement attorney general can put me on his little watch list. I've heard threats from morons all my life one more won't make a big dent. I have a flaming skull tattoo and a woman with a sword i like to call my version of Lady Justice so I guess because of those and my undying faithlessness in the government I'll be labeled a terrorist oh well.

[edit on 10-04-08 by Beach Bum]

Okay...read the thread and the amendment...still confused.

No place in the amendment does it discuss designating "Gun owners" and "Tax Protesters" as terrorists.

It discusses Hate Groups who specifically encourage and espouse violence...or groups that advocate the "armed" overthrow of the government.

You can oppose the government...this bill draws the line at actually assembling an armed force with the proclaimed intent to inflict armed violence against the government...ya know....terrorists.

Is the idea that the NRA (or whoever spins this into this kind of BS) thinks that we will just see want we want to see and not actually read or research it?

Seriously...read the amendment.

[edit on 7-7-2009 by maybereal11]

[edit on 7-7-2009 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by mnemeth1

The powers are sweeping and broad.

The AG will have the power to designate ANY anti-big government group as a hate group.

It will prevent members of small government groups such as "campaign for liberty" or tea party groups from admission into our armed forces.

Please direct me to where in the amendment it states any of the above?

Originally posted by maybereal11
Okay...read the thread and the amendment...still confused.

No place in the amendment does it discuss designating "Gun owners" and "Tax Protesters" as terrorists.

Remember when Tipper Gore got all rowdy over the metal bands in the 80s? She found violent and offensive lyrics in some songs. But really, if you look for something, you'll find it. It's kind of like looking in a dusty or dirty mirror expecting to find a face of a ghost. You'll find a face because your mind is looking for one.

If you're reading this amendment with the "they took our freedoms!" thought, you'll find what you're looking for.

This bill is to prevent hate in the military. But some people just enjoy looking for other meanings for it.

well this just goes to show you ... the pen is mighter than the individual... and what ever is controlling our country must be massively powerful... or something... how can they convert so many people to being well Communist... ?

and get away with it... if you noticed the rhetoric on the hill is almost like waaaa wahaaa ... they dont play fair ... whaaaw waaaa .....
well its hard to recall a bullet and this issue will not be over with until the last bullet flys

You see the definition of what constitutes a hate group will obviously be determined to maximum affect by the AG. The abuse of this bill is the point of contention. The criteria is based on what a person outside of the citizenry determines. Remember your history folks, the 50's ring any bells? Witch hunts for communists! It sounds like the same kind of deal now.