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.

 

Obama Makes Free Speech a Felony

page: 3
32
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by swan001
It's in Illuminati's plan to show that Obama is a monster. Altough I a agree that Obama acts like a dictator, I feel he's only a puppet controled by someone much bigger than him.


Perhaps. I think it is a double-think feign. It's too tinfoil for this thread, I'll wager. =)




posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Are you serious? Then our President is simply chickensh*t then. If he refused to sign it, and it ended up costing his life at least I would of had respect for him, but of course he would...He is just another puppet...
edit on 24-4-2012 by KonquestAbySS because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:18 PM
link   
I hope Osama.. oops i mean Obama reads this or even as long as any of his little puppets do. " how about all you in power GO FFAK YOURSELVES, we (the public) WILL NEVER BE SILENCED" how does Obama like that for free speech? I hope his ears are ringing right about now.

edit on 24-4-2012 by descendedstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:33 PM
link   

An enemy of the state is a person accused of certain crimes against the state, such as treason. Describing individuals in this way is sometimes a manifestation of political repression. For example, an authoritarian regime may purport to maintain national security by describing social or political dissidents as "enemies of the state".

en.wikipedia.org...

I think America is at the dawn of a new age McCarthyism. If you are not a Republican or a Democrat you will be considered an 'enemy of the state'. Socialism is coming and they know it.
edit on 24-4-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
In reply to original post, from what I understand this would only apply if an individual where within close proximity to the President and the agents assigned to him. Which I can not say for anyone else, but I have never been within ear shot of any President so the only way I could see this being a problem would be in relation to the phrase, "You give an inch, they take a mile". Even then, if someone were to be incarcerated for violating such a "law" I am certain the case would land within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Appeals. Where then a new precedent would be set, or as common sense would lead one to believe that the law would be cut down due to the obvious infringement of the free speech clause guaranteed by the first Amendment. I would predict the law would be struck down as soon it lands in court with the obvious amount of ease it would take to prepare a defense. In the end, the Supreme Court is in place to interpret laws, this would only lead to one logical conclusion in my humble opinion... case gets thrown out and the defendant is clear of any wrong doings.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Timical
 

this particular case is already in the Supreme Court www.scotusblog.com...

www.scotusblog.com...

www.youtube.com... a discussion thereof (halfway through)

On Wednesday, the US Supreme Court heard oral argument in an appeal that is asking the justices to enact a special rule exempting US Secret Service agents -- and potentially all law enforcement officials -- from civil liability for arresting someone allegedly in retaliation for the offensive content of their speech.



www.youtube.com... this is another example of the constitution meaning nothing

www.youtube.com... and this one is one more example of being jailed for freedom of speech


edit on 24-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus
 





If you are not a Republican or a Democrat you will be considered an 'enemy of the state'. Socialism is coming and they know it.


What we need to do is an enema on the White House, and relieve the constipation our country is currently suffering from. The only solution is to rebuild, and start all over again...



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


The video you posted was for a State Supreme Court.... so I disagree. No state court trumps a Supreme Court, especially the Supreme Court of Appeals. This is has been demonstrated several times throughout the history of the United States of America. I will state this more clearly, I received the impression that the law in question was of federal design not state. Any appeal to such law would end up in the FEDERAL Supreme Court of Appeals. I appreciate you replying. Please inform me if I am mistaken on something, I love learning new material.

I apologize for I failed to address your second video as it somehow slipped past me. In that video take note of the building the man is being arrested in, there is a reason he is being arrested. Utilize a search engine please, I am not in the mood to do all of the leg work right now.
edit on 24-4-2012 by Timical because: Incomplete reply



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Timical
 


I added a US Supreme Court case being heard (and decided upon) right now (not state)


edit on 24-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Why blame it all on Obama when congress had to vote on this to get it passed?



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


Nice find on the final addition of videos and the case currently in progress. For the video, it is mention that the individual physically touched Dick Cheney, half of an excuse to arrest someone for but it happened. His argument is that he was arrested for his speech, that he would have had to prove without a doubt was the cause. Had he not placed a hand on said individual, no arrest would of occurred, or at the very least he could have a nice settlement. But once again this is only if he had not made physical contact. Nobody is perfect, the guy was probably getting annoying, but he made one mistake. Good luck for him in making his case that he arrested soley due to his speech and not due to him being a possible threat.

As for the case in progress, that is indeed an splendid find and I applaud you. I am interested to see the final decision and thank you for sharing.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Timical
 


He was not arrested at the time, the secret service who were present had decided it was not threatening and not cause for arrest, it was later that a secret service agent decided to have him arrested, and all charges were subsequently dropped.

You should read the briefs, very interesting. maestro.abanet.org...

His argument is that he was not arrested for touching Cheney, but for what he said...I agree with this premise because if he appeared a physical threat he would have been arrested at the time of the incident and not later.
edit on 24-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


Yes, that is what I said. Once again, nice find. I can not fathom for there to be a need to say anything else, so thank you for the exchange I enjoyed it.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Hey man it isn't Obama's fault, he is just following orders like a good little soldier.

Orders from Satan that is, you know, the guy that runs USA since Kennedy Assassination



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   
apparently this law just had "added language to it." It's been around since 1971. basically fox over hyped it and it's for people crossing restricted zones. Kinda like trespassing. So you can still protest. Just don'e pass the restricted area.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”


Joseph Goebbels

It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Think this is a good fit to the thread.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   
Another good fit to this thread,speaking of the lack of Constitutional protection...

"Constitution-Free Zones"!
www.aclu.org...

I found this interesting. While they may not be actively cracking down on everyone's rights at the moment,just having it on the books makes it significant.

The groundwork has been being laid for a long,long time. Each one of these laws is another nail in the coffin of liberty.
edit on 25-4-2012 by On the Edge because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 


Wow this is pretty scary stuff, if I was an American I would be pretty nervous right now. I don't exactly know what's going on in the US at the moment but here in Australia our "undemocratically-elected leader" has deployed various scapegoats to ensure she remains in power. Even though she is driving the country into ruin Gillard has remained defiant (much like a dictator), these are definately uncertain times we are living in. Reminds me of the leadup to the Great War.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
reply to post by Germanicus
 





If you are not a Republican or a Democrat you will be considered an 'enemy of the state'. Socialism is coming and they know it.


What we need to do is an enema on the White House, and relieve the constipation our country is currently suffering from. The only solution is to rebuild, and start all over again...


Thats very true, and I think America would benefit greatly from a collapse. It would make America a much smaller place because you would no longer have bases all over the world, etc but then it would leave resources to rebuild America.
Much like the collapse of the Soviet Union, it has benefited Russia greatly and they are well on their way to reclaiming the title of Superpower status.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 


I've been reading a book called "The End of America". I'm not done with it yet but it is basically describing how our democracy is slowly being turned into a fascist state.

It compares America to Nazi Germany. It's actually amazing how democratically Germany lost their freedoms to the Nazi party. This book goes on to describe ten steps to a fascist state that every fascist state makes. America is following many of them.

Because of what I've read I've come up with my own quote, "When freedoms are taken from a countries citizenry by its government to protect them from their freedoms; that government has failed and should be replaced."

I mean think about it. Our rights are being taken away to protect us from terrorism which has no beginning and no end. That being said they can almost indefinitely remove our freedoms to protect us from a threat that isn't necessarily there. Which means we are the threat to the government. That's how it should be though. When people believe the government is infringing on their basic rights and liberties it is the duty of the people to replace that government. Since the government is meant to be a tool of the people it certainly shouldn't mind being replaced or radically altered.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join