Thinking for Yourself is Now a Crime--must read for ATS'ers, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 34 times


reply posted on 10-1-2008 @ 06:38 AM by Yoush
First post here, although i have read a lot of articles.

I think this is the reason things are going downhill for the american nation. This overly "trapped" approach to civilians. "Lets keep them so trapped that they follow exactly what we want". Yet as americans what do you do? or what can you do? Is it so far gone now that the idea of freedom of speach is losing the battle to "terrorism" (which in my opinion is the latest cop out for the goverment to use). Look at 9/11 (sorry, i know it gets used a lot but that because it is a big pointer in the american goverment), so many ways to prevent it from back in the 60's to the time of impact and yet nothing was done??

In britian (where i live) before the iraq invasion a poll was taken and 58+% said NO to helping USA with Iraq because it was a pointless venture. What happened? We went anyway!!

This false sense of security is really making me angry, i dont know what we can do but as far as ATS community we must take a positive stand. We are a community that looks to the future and are open to many theories...so look at the world, how its taking shape is worrying!!!

Anyway, i think this new access to basically listening and judging everyone simply on opinions is a massive overwrite of your (as americans) but our as people(s) freedom! If i think (and im not alone here) bush is an worthless piece of S**T and someone is listening to me say that...will i be killed or "punished" for my view? Does this stop the generation of opinions? Which in turn means the goverment can do anything and anyone arguing will be classed as a terrorist!!

So are the US going into Iraq etc. to help create a "free" country, with these kind of laws back at home??? In my opinion this is absolutely obsurd!!

I think thats it from me...i would love to keep going but i just feel really frustrated while writing because it is such an important topic and there are so many scenario's and possiblities that could result and it almost feels like there is nothing to stop it.

Thanks for reading, I appreciate it!



reply posted on 10-1-2008 @ 10:13 AM by Amaxium
Originally posted by Amaxium
Originally posted by mid summer set us free
reply to
post by palehorse23



The beast has already set up one of his enormous bronze statues titled saviour of the world in the amazon jungle.


Where exactly is this supposed statue you are referring to?

Originally posted by mid summer set us free
reply to post by palehorse23


Everyone that watches American IDOL are already worshipping the image of the beast.


What image are you referencing? Since you refernce 2 things specifically, you should have no problem providing photographic evidence of this. I am a believer, but you make a large claim regarding "the beast."


Since "mid summer set us free" seems to be unavailable I found this trying to research mid's calim to "the beast" statue in the Amazonian jungle. I found this as possible what mid was referrencing.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Anyone have any different information or new information regarding this?

As for the American IDOL symbol mid was referrencing, just because many people do not like Simon and most agree he is a pompous jerk does not mean he is related to the "beast" symbol. LOL I am not seeing a connection with an American IDOL symbol, though, as a symbol for the "beast."

So far, I am getting that mid summer set us free is claiming that "the beast" is Prince Charles of Wales, the soon to be King of England. Mid... am I correct in this interpretation?

This could possible be the start of a new thread.


reply posted on 13-1-2008 @ 07:21 AM by Nailer
The end of Free Speech in America has arrived at our doorstep. It's a new law called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, and it is worded in a clever way that could allow the U.S. government to arrest and incarcerate any individual who speaks out against the Bush Administration, the war on Iraq, the Department of Homeland Security or any government agency (including the FDA). The law has already passed the House on a traitorous vote of 405 to 6, and it is now being considered in the Senate where a vote is imminent. All over the internet, intelligent people who care about freedom are speaking out against this extremely dangerous law: Philip Giraldi at the Huffington Post, Declan McCullagh at CNET's News.com, Kathryn Smith at OpEdNews.com, and of course Alex Jones at PrisonPlanet.com

This bill is the beginning of the end of Free Speech in America. If it passes, all the information sources you know and trust could be shut down and their authors imprisoned. NewsTarget could be taken offline and I could be arrested as a "terrorist." Jeff Rense at www.Rense.com could be labeled a "terrorist" and arrested. Byron Richards, Len Horowitz, Paul Craig Roberts, Greg Palast, Ron Paul and even Al Gore could all be arrested, silenced and incarcerated. This is not an exaggeration. It is a literal reading of the law, which you can check yourself here:
thomas.loc.gov...

The bill states:

‘...ideologically based violence’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual’s political, religious, or social beliefs...

Note that this means the "planned use of force to promote a political or social belief" would be considered an act of terrorism. This all hinges on the definition of "force," of course. Based on the loose use of logic in Washington these days, and the slippery interpretation of the meaning of words, "force" could mean:

• A grassroots campaign to barrage Congress with faxes
• A non-violent street protest
• A letter-writing campaign that deluges the Senate with too much mail
• A sit-in protest that blocks access to a business or organization
• A grassroots e-mail campaign that overloads the e-mail servers of any government department or agency

You get the idea. "Force" could be defined as practically anything. And since the "planned use of force" would be considered a criminal act of terrorism, anyone who simply thinks about a grassroots action campaign would be engaged in terrorist acts.

If you stopped someone on the street and handed them a Bible, for example, this could be considered an act of terrorism ("...use of force to promote the individual's religious beliefs...")

If you sent a barrage of angry letters to Washington about global warming and the destruction of the environment by the U.S. military, this could also be considered an act of terrorism ("...to promote the individual's political beliefs...")
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^