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.

 

Two Portlanders refuse to testify before grand jury after FBI raid

page: 3
30
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
It is interesting to me that people still hold the idea of free speech as something that is you have a right to express without hassle.

When has there ever been free speech in this country? McCarthy Hearings anyone?

Does the Constitution say you have no right to be hassled about what you say?

The crux of the issue for folks is that fail to see how things ACTUALLY work. You are free to say what you want, and others are free to hassle you for what you may or may not say. You can get a lawyer - expensive to you but not the government, and you can argue free speech once you get into court. And in most cases you will win, but you will spend all your energy fighting the court cast and be broke, tired, ostracized at the end.

Folks just don't get it. There is vast difference between what an idea is and what the real world is. You are not protected from being harassed or arrested for saying something protected under the free speech clause. The free speech provision gives you a point of reference to argue once you actually get into court, but that point of reference does not stop the harassment.

I'm not sure why folks don't see the reality as well as they see the idea.




posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
It's not just an anti-government position, it's a seeking to overthrow the government because you work for foreign interests position.

Which is what Communism is. Usually anyway.

After all, there are Communists and socialists in congress, so it can't be just any ole ordinary anti-government stance.

Many hate groups in America do seek to overthrow the government in any way they can. And while some people might latch on to terms like anti-government literature, and it seems like it's generic, but really, when you read those papers and manifestos or whatnot, it's really all about overthrowing the Republic and installing a tyranny. They also love to throw terms like freedom and the American way a lot too, so really, it's just not anti-government stuff.

It's all in the context of what the literature says.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by VikingWarlord
 


which is why they are wrong. Pedophiles get let off because cops make an insignificant clerical error on paper work.

The violate the constitution of our country.......for vandalism.......they must be insane....or traitors....no American in his right mind would do that unless he was no longer a member of our DEMOCRATIC society.

They changed teams. Simple as that.

They set a precedent that future leaders can exploit to abuse our people. Like if tomorrow republicans cant publish anything....who do you think will win an election?

What if, I don't know....they want to get rid of 6 million Jews for example........who would be ABLE to stop them....

They have no idea the can of worms they opened. We don't know the full repercussions of not being able to speak freely or publish something another might not find agreeable politically. Well we do. Look to history and every example of tyranny. People didn't agree to that crap. They just couldn't speak about it to oppose it. That's why it happened.

Their kids will curse their graves. Ask a German about sentiment in the long years after Hitler rose to power. Ask them how it was working out. All the changes they made to their lives for the satisfaction of paranoid maniacs.


edit on 3-8-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
It's not just an anti-government position, it's a seeking to overthrow the government because you work for foreign interests position.



It has been claimed, but not proven, that they 'work for foreign interests'. he name of the 'group' they are affiliated with is called the "Common Struggle Libertarian Communist Federation." and are solely based in the north west US.

Facts. Stick to them.
edit on 3-8-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by crankyoldman
 


I think jail is more than a hassle. Government doing the "hassling" is called abuse of power. Oh, and the communist witch hunt is something we are ashamed of. We regret it. We don't accept it as something "normal"

Democratic societies can print and talk about things....yes...we had that.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I think the search warrant is too generic, from what coud be gleaned from the news. "Anti-government" is too vague; the warrant needs to specify which government. It is an assumption that it is about anti-American literature, but that was not written. See the FBI could be looking for international terrorists. Some foreign government, let's lay it's The Holy Establishment of Sandalphon Planet (THESP, where the citizens are called thespians), for argument's sake, says that there is a runaway anti-thesp government spy on USA soil that is planning a revolt against the Establishment. Now for international treaties, the FBI is looking for a transnational terrorist. So technically they are working on behalf of another government when they serve this warrant.

See how that can be used against any household in the nation?

Personally I don't care what literature my neighbors have in their homes. They can have a little Red Book and a Green Book, and a Quran, and a Bible, and Dianetics, and more, and that is protected as free speech. Now, it's what they do with that literature which could lead to problems, but censoring their household of literature will be hurting their rights and setting an example to the public for future rights abuses. If they want to read the Anarchist's Cookbook, go ahead. Just don't use your knowledge in a destructive manner upon others.

I actually prefer for this stuff to become common knowledge, and then to add to it that just because you know how to build something destructive doesn't mean you're going to do it. There are values called morals, ethics, and common sense, that keep others from doing this, despite having an abundance of resources for bad activities. When it stops becoming coveted secret information in scarce supply, the desire to use it to extremes often goes away.

Well whatever they had in their home that was so important the FBI took it away and locked it up, now I want to see it. Was it for the next occupy movement? Was it pictures of Obama? I gather it was related to the voting season. When policy overrides privacy, that is a problem in any country.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by BIHOTZ
reply to post by crankyoldman
 


I think jail is more than a hassle. Government doing the "hassling" is called abuse of power. Oh, and the communist witch hunt is something we are ashamed of. We regret it. We don't accept it as something "normal"

Democratic societies can print and talk about things....yes...we had that.






Your doesn't speak to the point: McCarthy is only a well known example, so pointing out "we" are ashamed is irrelevant, further I am not ashamed so "we" excludes me, as I was not part of it and I cannot be ashamed of something that had nothing to do with me, that's just foolish. There are countless other large scale events: formation of unions in the 20th century comes to mind.

There is no such thing as freedom of speech as an actual practice, there never has been - ever. At any time, at any place, you can be engaged by the police or other synthetic authority and be subject to their wrath and the Freedom Of Speech Amendment does not protect you from it, it only aids in extracting yourself from the problem was the net has been cast upon you.

"Congress shall make no law" is not the same as "congress shall not bother you ever." Congress doesn't bother either, it is the thugs that operate under the safety of that provision, as those thugs, for acting against either the language or the spirit of the provision are not subject to any sort of penalty for abusing their synthetic authority.

There is no freedom of speech, period. In fact, due to Hate Laws, the freedom of speech provision has been bypassed altogether and is no longer a viable defense if another can simply show what you said hurt their feelings or worse, could have hurt there feelings.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 


Not only is it your moral responsibility to keep a watchful eye on your government but it is your fundamental right to fight tooth and nail to keep your government as small as you can..not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden.
if memory serves that was Barry Goldwater



Three groups spend other people’s money: children, thieves, politicians. All three need supervision. Dick Armey always had a way with the simplistic



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Scope out these quotes and up hold such valiant principles.


"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right, and only the same right, to use force in defending himself as he would have in repelling any other assault and battery." State v. Robinson 145 Me. 77,72 Atl. 2d 260, 262 (1950).

"It must be recognized that whenever a police officer accosts an individual and restrains his freedom to walk away, he has 'seized' that person." Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1, 16 (1968)

"In sum then, individuals accosted by police on the basis merely of reasonable suspicion have a right not to be searched, a right to remain silent, and, as a corollary, a right not to be searched if they choose to remain silent. Justices Brennan, Marshall and Stevens dissenting in Michigan v. DeFillipo 443 US at 45

"The offense of resisting arrest, both at common law and under statute, presupposes a lawful arrest. It is axiomatic (self-evident) that every person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such case the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self-defense." State v. Mobley 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100,102 (1954). Source


Though I may not be an American I am a human being that demands respect from elected government as they in return make due demand of it. If their houses are built upon the foundations of sneaking corruption then such a thing must be ousted and replaced with pure goodness and wisdom.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I am in the process of reading The Anti-Government Movement Guidebook and it is a excellent, if long read.


Part I includes an essay that provides a historic overview of the "common law courts" movement.

Parts II through IV include a discussion of many of the common tactics used by members of
these groups - both in and against the courts - as well as typical responses to each tactic. Part V is a
brief introduction to and discussion of the relationship between potential responses to the tactics and
the Trial Court Performance Standards ("TCPS")

The final part of this guide contains three appendices. The first two of those, Appendix A and
Appendix B, are general resource guides. These include sample state legislative responses, and links
to Patriot, militia, common law courts and other antigovernment websites. Appendix C is a sampling
of various "movement documents" - pleadings, essays and articles written by followers of the various
movements



There is a movement afoot in this country today that is made up of disaffected and often dispossessed Americans who are seeking a better way through a wholesale return to their view of the past. This movement has been called many things: the antigovernment movement, the sovereignty movement, and the common law courts movement.

Regardless of the name attached to the beliefs and the people who follow them, one common denominator exists: a feeling of despair, rooted in personal and pecuniary loss, and manifested in a new, defiant mistrust and spite for the ways of the current government. This guide focuses on the ways in which followers of these movements impact the operation of our state court systems.

While the commentators have discussed these movements from all angles - ranging from ridicule to outrage to fear - most of the mainstream pundits discount the powerful emotion that drives individuals from the fold of our everyday society and into the ranks of the modem patriots. This guide asks that our state courts not take these individuals and their problems and concerns so lightly. Source


Of course it may not be every ones cup of tea but I thought I might as well put a link to it as its relevance as to be informative to the thread written here.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Remember, the government is we the people. When anarchists go against the government in a wet dream to making it fall, they really go against we the people, in hopes of enslaving we the people to another form of government. Their flavor looks to be communist. It is the governments sworn duty as representatives of we the people to protect we the people from seditious conspiracy and insurrection.

You all act as if this is a travesty, no it is LAW and has been in one form or another since WWII or earlier.

18 USC § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy


If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.


18 USC § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government


Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.


Aren't these infact laws that go against the 2nd amendement?

Not to right to bear arms aspect, but the part about having a right to bear arms to OVERTHROW via a well-armed miltia a tyrannical government.

Those laws seem to outlaw the forming of an opinion that our government is tyrannical and needs overthrown.

Furthermore, don't those laws also go in conflict with the right to free speech? They are not yelling fire. They are trying to propagate an opinion they have come to.


edit on 3-8-2012 by johnnysixguns because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Common Good
I wore all black in honor of them yesterday =)

Cops kept looking at me walkin down the road haha.

Since when is it against the law to have an anti government stance? I hope those arrested get back at them for
stepping on their rights as free men.



You have the right to express your anti-government stance on voting day.

But, after the vote is counted, you're expected to hold your peace until the next voting day.

I don't think they can restrict black clothing, since it would upset the Orthodox Jews.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Sek82
 


The US government has been occupying countries that do not belong to them, do you really think they care about us?



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 05:25 AM
link   
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
— Thomas Jefferson

"... rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our own will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual"
— Thomas Jefferson

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy"
— James Madison



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by NAMTERCES
 


Could you cite your sources to that?

Is that opinion? Law?

I don't think that is true at all based upon the Constitution or BoR.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Common Good
I wore all black in honor of them yesterday =)

Cops kept looking at me walkin down the road haha.

Since when is it against the law to have an anti government stance? I hope those arrested get back at them for
stepping on their rights as free men.


it's called suspicous behavior...government has a right to investigate suspicious behavior as it would apply to violence against the government entities and/or employees.
why would you think you are free?



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Every day, I see more and more people in this country who would follow eachother into a burning building if the government told them it was for the best. More and more people seem to be falling for the idea that the government actually has their best interest at heart and wouldn't hurt them.

Its sad and maddening at the same time.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Apparently it is about Vandalism. I am just at a loss why the FBI got involved rather than the police. Can somebody riddle me that?


They vandalised federal property, that would be why.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by JayFlores
reply to post by VikingWarlord
 


Communist thought process or not, they still have a RIGHT to their opinion and to express that opinion. That is insured in the Constitution of the United States. I may not agree with what they spew, but I will darn sure stand up for their right to say it.


Will you stand up for their right to spew it on your property and spray paint it on your house and cars? That's what this is about. Not their opinion, but the way they expressed it, by vandalising federal property, which no one has the right to do.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by VikingWarlord
reply to post by JayFlores
 
This is where there is controversy, they supposedly vandalized government property and squatted in houses. Does that activity warrant investigation by the FBI? I just don't like the fact that in the warrant they mentioned going after literature that they possessed. That is a bit much.



What if the literature ties them to the vandalising. Such as quotes from the literature found in their posession were found at the crime scene. Depending on the facts, the literature could be key evidence.







 
30
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join