Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)

    Keith Olbermann Special Comment *MR BUSH YOU ARE A FASCIST!*

    Keith Olbermann Special Comment *MR BUSH YOU ARE A FASCIST!*
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member Dianne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Here is something even more scarey: ... a4d4b3add0

    Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech
    Across America

    by Mike Adams

    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
    091.html> , Declan McCullagh at CNET's
    < , Kathryn
    Smith at
    opp.htm> , and of course Alex Jones at

    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
    <> 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:

    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 (" promote the individual's political

    If you believe in same-sex marriage and you wrote a letter threatning a
    sit-in protest in front of your state's capitol building, this could also be
    considered an act of terrorism, even if you never carried it out!
    ("...planned use of force to promote a social belief...")

    The United States is on the fast track to fascism, and the Congress is
    working right alongside this nation's traitorous leaders to criminalize any
    thoughts, words or speeches that disagree with current government policies
    regarding war, terrorism, domestic surveillance and civil liberties. Simply
    speaking out against the war on Iraq could soon be labeled a crime. Merely
    thinking thoughts against the war on Iraq could be considered a criminal

  3. #3
    Senior Member zeezil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Can Olberman even get more moronic? He's always been a huge socialist libidiot that only a complete libidiot can understand. I'd like to se Ann Coulter take him on in a girlie slap-fest.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    Senior Member roundabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    The reformation of the church was a direct result of the invention of the printing press. The church and all governments have been scared since. They quickly gaineded control of the press through laws, manipulation of editors and writters, using both monetary or territorial exclusivity promises to papers and publishers and publishing houses governments and rulers of nations have been able to control the thoughts and the direction of policy since.

    The internet is the Hiedelburg Press of today. Times 1 billion! (pick a number it is HUGE.)

    History of the medias is very interesting.

    Read Paul Starr, The Creation of the Media

  5. #5
    Senior Member roundabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    If anarchy pops up it's ugly head as peoples gain more and more of un-biased information, or just information that appeals to particular groups of peoples, whats a government to do?

    If censorship controls, what is the outcome of a medium (internet) that has no censors?

    This is the first time in history that peoples can communicate on such a massive scale across all borders and cultures and faiths and political persuasions at a speed that is indeed mind blowing.

    Is it best to have the powers to be censor the peoples information available to them? Or to face utter chaos?

    It is indeed a brave new world.

    Trekkies unite! To go where no man has gone before! (or something like that)

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Oregon (pronounced "ore-ee-gun")
    (IMHO)... Out of all the major cable networks, MSNBC is the 'least best' and still has only a tiny fraction of the overall market share in this area (about 10%-12% of the space occupied by CNN, Fox, and MSNBC). My local cable provider recently replaced it's spot on our channel listing with the WeatherChannel (which, I'll admit to being very grateful for ). Now, to get MSNBC you have to pay extra (which I'll never do BTW). Anyway...

    Keith Olbermann Special Comment *MR BUSH YOU ARE A FASCIST!*
    Technically, that is a basically accurate assessment. Governments that become complicit with large corporate and monied interests fit the mold which defines a Fascist type of government vs. a 'Socialist' one.

    Under Boosh, he has pushed de-regulation and lax enforcement of private companies while helping to privatize many things that belong in the public sphere as well.

    In addition, he has spurred greater governmental military/police infringement upon civil liberties. These aspects above form the hallmark of a fascist variant of government.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts