It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lindsey Graham Advocates Killing First Amendment

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:11 AM
link   

“I wish we could find a way to hold people accountable. Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war,” Graham told CBS’ Bob Schieffer on Sunday.

Graham mentioned government censorship of the First Amendment during the Second World War. FDR signed Executive Order 8985 in December of 1941 and established the Office of Censorship. The order gave a legion of bureaucrats “absolute discretion” over the exercise of the First Amendment and the free speech of all Americans.


Lindsey Graham Advocates Killing First Amendment


War is declared by "The People" (Congress). War has an end when the enemy surrenders and signs the surrender. There should be no authority of censorship without a declaration of war on a nation or nations.

Under the premise that you ban free speech without a declaration of war he is advocating a permanant ban on free speech as this appears to be a permament war.
edit on 4-4-2011 by Analyze76 because: sas

Mod Edit : Posting work written by others.– Please Review This Link.

edit on 4-4-2011 by xpert11 because: Mod note , add external source tags



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:22 AM
link   
This doesnt suprise me in the least

The sad part is no one will care. No one will protest. No one will even bother to vote him out



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Analyze76
 


Oh, where are the Teabaggers to haul his ass out of office?

Oh right, they only pick battles over certain parts of the Constitution.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:30 AM
link   
The TEA Party must love this guy. He is doing exactly what they want.

Sure, go ahead, get rid of that first Amendment. That way, they can turn this country into a Christian Theocracy.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   
I really cannot see how you can POSSIBLY have a democratic government without freedom of speech.

That man is dangerous to the nation.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   
Unfortunately, he's from South Carolina, which isn't a state you can do a recall in.

Hmm...it seems like that should be something that EVERY state should be able to do, now that I think about it. They are voted in by the people (in theory), so why can't they be pulled out by the people if they don't do what the people want (or act like idiots like this guy)? If every state had that power, and the people were reasonably able to exercise it (I read on another thread here that that is a whole other problem), then the elected officials would be MUCH more accountable to the people.

I wish I had woken up sooner to all this madness. Oh well, better late than never.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by hadriana
I really cannot see how you can POSSIBLY have a democratic government without freedom of speech.

That man is dangerous to the nation.


We already don't have a democratic government
This would just be one more nail of many in the coffin. It's far to overt though. The globalist agenda operates on a policy of closed doors and deception.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
LOL the man did not say "kill" the first amendment.
He did however "condemn" the action the koran burning preacher did.
Anyone can "condemn" anything i do as i care not what you think.
Now to prosecute is another thing, then you will have a fight.
By the way this is just more "Scare em all al jones" propaganda.
Some of the people around understamd that killing the 1st Amendment is akin to killing the 2nd.
Those are both deal breakers, therefore that will not happen.
We would then have legal grounds to go after TPTB.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   
I'm not sure we have any rights unless you have a dream team of lawyers to back them up.

You have the right to remain silent, until rendition and torture. Anything we can dig up on you (or make up) can and will be used against you. You have the right to speak to an attorney, but only if they want to listen to you. If you can't afford an attorney, someone who pretends to be an attorney will work on the court's behalf to screw you, and still charge you a fee. If you represent yourself, we will make an example of you regardless if you have legal training or not. Even if you understand these rights as they have been read to you doesn't mean it will do you any good in a court of law. We have the right to represent your accuser who you will never see in your court case. You have the right to be taxed and fined multiple times for the same offense and to be charged for being in court and staying in a jail already paid for by your tax money.

Just tell the Judge that you have unalienable rights bestowed upon you by your creator and see how you get treated.
edit on 4-4-2011 by MichiganSwampBuck because: clairifaction

edit on 4-4-2011 by MichiganSwampBuck because: typo



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by MichiganSwampBuck
 


Good point but as long as we have the 2nd amendment we can prop up the 1st and vise versa.
The 2nd amendment allows us to have a street trial in the event of a worst case scenario.
It is a part of the check and balance system.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. John F. Kennedy



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:46 AM
link   
 




 



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I am REALLY startled and taken back by what he just said. It scares me and I do not scare too easily. This guy is suggesting we put our rights of free speech on hold because he is scared that the bad guys will attack him? Isn't that like declaring victory for the fundamentalist muslims and admitting defeat for the United States and our freedoms?

We cannot exercise our freedoms because the bad guys will try and hurt us? Cowboy up Lindsey Graham and act like a patriot. Stop acting like a scared little baby. THIS is the battlefield. Not some mudhole in a worthless mountainous region devoid of any attainable resources. THIS is the battlefield, the fight between what we consider to be rights and freedoms for Americans, or the desire for fundamentalist Muslims to dictate to us what those freedoms will be. We cannot afford to negotiate. Fundamentalist Muslims have to accept the fact that in the U.S. these freedoms are non negotiable. We do not trade with them. We do not make deals with them. We do not sacrifice them.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join