Once signed, HR 347 will empower federal agents to arrest and bring felony criminal charges against citizens engaged in political protests anywhere in the USA.
OUTLAWING THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT: HR 347 MAKES FREE SPEECH A FELONY
The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America reads as follows:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
At 7:03pm ET on Tuesday, 28 February 2012, our 112th Congress violated this covenant with the American people by voting 399 to 3 in favor of H.R. 347, a bill which breezed through the Senate with unanimous consent and now lacks only corporate fascist puppet President Barack Obama's signature to become law. The three patriots who voted Nay were Paul Broun (R-GA-10), Justin Amash (R-MI-3) and Ron Paul (R-TX-14). The traitors who voted Yea are listed here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-149
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Euphemistically titled the "Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act" and referred to by our corporate-controlled mainstream media as a "non-controversial bill", a more truthful moniker for HR 347 would be the "First Amendment Rights Eradication Act". As Representative Amash lamented on his Facebook page:
"Current law makes it illegal to enter or remain in an area where certain government officials (more particularly, those with Secret Service protection) will be visiting temporarily if and only if the person knows it's illegal to enter the restricted area but does so anyway. [H.R. 347] expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal... [And to] show you the extent to which the public is misled and misinformed about the legislation we are voting on, read one prominent media outlet's coverage of the same bill: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/212873-house-approves-white-house-trespass-bill-sends-to-obama The report mischaracterizes not only current law but also the changes proposed by the bill."
The full text of H.R. 347 is available here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-347
Obviously aimed at the Occupy Movement, these modifications to U.S. Code Title 18 Section 1752 will seriously diminish the right of American citizens to petition their Government for a redress of grievances by outlawing protests where key government officials or other VIP's may be nearby. Federal law enforcement agents will be empowered to bring these charges against Americans engaged in political protests anywhere in the country, and violators will face criminal penalties that include imprisonment for up to 10 years.
Welcome to Fourth Reich Amerika...
NO MORE LEFT. NO MORE RIGHT. TIME TO UNITE. STAND AND FIGHT!
IronBoltBruce via VVV PR ( http://veritasvirtualvengeance.com | @vvvpr )
Img: http://veritasvirtualvengeance.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/hr347_free_speech_is_now_a_felony.jpg
Vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9cp7aVH7OE
Spt: https://www.wepay.com/donate/ironboltbruce
Tag: #hr347, #martiallaw, #fascism, #fascist, #fascists, #occupy, #ows, #vvvpr
###
REGARDING REDDIT
Reddit r/Politics exists to perpetuate our Demopublican two-puppet political system: What you see posted on Reddit r/Politics is NOT what was SUBMITTED but what was APPROVED by their censorship system. And Reddit "Karma" is NOT a measure of actual KARMA but groupthink CONFORMITY.
###
We sometimes use links shortened with http://tinyurl.com to so they don't break in emails. If you actually think we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, open them with this: http://longurl.org. We also want to thank the web designer miami beach, web development miami and web developer miami who support our efforts.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Kerry Lauerman
Joan Walsh
Salon.com
Comments
As Ralph Nader and and Reagan conservative Bruce Fine outline at a recent Harvard Record presentation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8kla2T0NQQ) all these people are in violation of their oath of office to uphold the Constitution. In addition to signing the petition to impeach Obama for high crimes and misdemeanors (http://floydreports.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=3668d6dcdf76634e54cc134ed&id=bd36de9aaa), we all need to lean on our Congress persons about initiating articles of impeachment. Fine says we need to call and email these people everyday until they take action. Nader says the Occupy movement needs to occupy congressional offices.
This law, combined with the new laws that give the military unlimited right to detain ANYONE for an indefinite term, without charges or trial, which will be extended to the police when they fall under military jurisdiction, and the full forces of fascism in the US will be ready to put their foot down and end all citizen objection to their establishment of a fascist oligarchy. Then watch how fast those 600+ internment camps will fill up!
Hitler must be choking with laughter!
.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-149
Here is more in-depth analysis of it that supports my conclusions:
http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/01/bill-passes-house-protests-near-secret-s
http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/01/does-hr-347-the-trespass-bill-change-any
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/11043-congress-passes-bill-severely-curtailing-first-amendment-liberties
Google for much more...
As a matter of fact, in the link you posted, http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/01/bill-passes-house-protests-near-secret-s, the author provides specific quotes from the bill, but, interestingly, seems to neglect the term "Whoever--knowingly" with each line.
In the link you posted, http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/01/does-hr-347-the-trespass-bill-change-any, the only word they focus on is the word "willfully", but interestingly again, seem to ignore the fact that the word "knowingly" is still there. I guess in the phrase that Amash says, "the person knows it's illegal to enter", he transposes "knows" with "willfully". I can see how that mistake can be made, but it renders this entire post moot because the point they are trying to make is that this law applies to those that "willfully" (or not "willfully") violate the law, but not necessarily those that "knowingly" (or not "knowingly") violate the law.
The last link you post, http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/11043-congress-passes-bill-severely-curtailing-first-amendment-liberties, focuses on anyone that participates in a protest. What the author neglects to discuss is that the bill is specific to anyone that attempts to disrupt or impede on government business or attempts to cause bodily harm. Maybe someone can explain to me how that is a violation of our First Amendment. If I wanted to go to work and someone was impeding me from getting my job done, I would want something done about it. If I wanted to go to work and someone was trying to do me harm, then I would most certainly want something done about it.
THE WORDING OF THE LAW:
(a) Whoever--
(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is--
(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if--
(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
(c) In this section--
(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area--
(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;
(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or
(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.
THE EFFECT OF THE LAW:
Americans cannot effectively exercise their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances if they cannot get close enough to state their protest to key government officials at "official functions" and "special events" - e.g. fundraisers, campaign stops and political conventions - without risking arrest and imprisonment for a year or more. And any protest that doesn't "impede or disrupt the orderly conduct" of its targeted venue isn't likely to have much of an impact.
We still have the power to nullify their laws when we get on juries. Bankers will scream bloody murder if we let people off on property crimes. I hope I get on a case where someone has ripped off a corporation or a bankster type. I look forward to letting them walk free.
Under this law, if I even stop a Congressman to ask a question -- if that Congressman doesn't like it, can he simply have me arrested under this law? After all, I stopped him and interrupted his ability to conduct his business in an orderly fashion.
Next question, could we have Congress Arrested for making this law, as it intereferes with citizens with public titles to conduct their regular business in an oderly fashion? After all, don't they have more important things to do beyond vacating the oaths of their offices and failing to support and defend the Constitution from all threats foreign or domestic?
I'm just surprised that the only dissenters were three Republicans. I'm surprised that ONLY 3 VOICEs out of nearly 500 said, "No."
Now that said, I don't think all Republicans are evil, bad, wrong or misguided. Just like I don't believe all Democrats are propelled by compassion, caring or social progress. There're plenty of examples of horrible politicians on both sides of the aisle. This law is a good representation of this as a fact.
Democracy 2.0:
Fire all Incumbents
Ask to Repeal the Patriot Act en toto
Reinstate Glass-Steagall
Strip back tax schedules to 1970 levels and guides.
Make it a requirement that American Companies manufacture all their products in this country or lose their American Corporate Status.
If those goddamn corporate bastards want corporations to be people, then if they live and work in another country, they're foreigners. 'Nuff said.
I think we really just need to agree, no matter our political views, to just start the hell over and get rid of all the current stables of politicians across the nation, no matter what. It's time we put our servants on notice.
--r--
The watchwords of this movement on the part of capital has been let the market determine all things public and private. Critics of this movement call it neoliberalism because it is the revival of liberalism in the Adam Smith sense of laissez-faire (let the market decide).
Because neoliberalism's inherent logic is to render the vast majority of the population (in today's common parlance, the 99%) insecure in their jobs and living standards so that big capital can make more profits - since a workforce that cannot organize and cannot bargain collectively, is deprived of a social safety net, and where industries flee to the cheapest labor markets they can find - authorities in the government and in business are relentlessly undermining the people's standard of living worldwide. As they do this, the natural result will be that the people will become more and more rebellious. Thus, neoliberal policies require that they institute more and more draconian (watching the frog boil...) measures to protect this process of being halted and reversed.
One expression of the reaction to these measures worldwide is anti-state terror to which governments have been waging their "war on terror" (i.e., state-sponsored terror). The WOT becomes the rationale for the increasingly fascist measures: (to name the most notable) the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the Warner Act, Obama's "sovereign immunity" and public embrace of executive ordered assassinations of "terrorists," the NDAA, and now this HR 347.
This trajectory cannot be slowed let alone halted and reversed through elections because the Democrats, just as the Republicans, are all neoliberals.
I delve into these matters in depth in my book Globalization and the Demolition of Society. See also the website that accompanies the book at DennisLoo.com.
Thank you for posting this!
This sentence in my comment above contains a typo. It now reads as
"Thus, neoliberal policies require that they institute more and more draconian (watching the frog boil...) measures to protect this process of being halted and reversed."
I meant to say:
Thus, neoliberal policies require that they institute more and more draconian (watching the frog boil...) measures to protect this process FROM being halted and reversed.
If you take into consideration the other decisions that protect the right of corporations to speak but not the right of the majority of the public to speak like Buckley v. Valeo, Citizens United and the consolidation of the Mass Media on one side and the implementation of “Free Speech Zones” at locations where no one is listening for the majority it is far more reasonable to believe that this is one more attack on sincere implementation of the first amendment!
You write: " [H.R. 347] expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal"
No, it doesnt:
"Whoever-- ‘(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
‘(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
‘(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or ]
‘(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence
"
Notice the repeated use of the word "knowingly".
Can we move on now?
Well, now we get to the heart of the matter. It's not that you'll be arrested if you accidentally commit these acts - as we've established, you must "knowingly, and with intent" commit these acts.
But here's your real issue: You want to be able to disrupt business WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE!
Basically, you want permission to commit illegal acts of civil disobedience! Amazing chutzpah!
Newsflash: Civil disobedience only works if you are breaking the law and accepting the consequence. You cant get permission to have a revolution.
What a generation we have now at the forefront of political activism.
If you want to disrupt, go ahead. Obviously the government is going to enforce laws against that; that's the whole point of civil disobedience!
Take your 1984 Ministry of Truth spin elsewhere. The actual wording of HR 347 speaks for itself, and multiple links thereto have been provided above. Do not expect to find compliant Sheeple accepting your BS here.
As much as I hate to say it, I believe we'll have to start exercising it....
The Petition link is @ http://wh.gov/9r0.
H.R.卐347 sets the precedence in taking away our rights "☮Tools" to keep this country FREE!
SAVE our first amendment rights by March 29, 2012!
Dear, Mr. Obama,
“For the ☮People, by the ☮People!” does not mean: “For the U.S. ☭Officials, by the U.S. ☭Officials”.
It may be easy to sign away our 1st basic rights, but try telling that to the Millions of people that DIED for them!
Tell us why Mr. Obama (?), now after almost 147 years later of Millions of people who FIGHT and DIED in the Civil War for our First Amendment Rights, that You & the Government are so concerned about those Patriot Americans express their objectionable views and believes to keep Government from interfering with our lives and families (?), that You and the U.S. Government always trying to find ways to spend those Americans hard working tax dollars in making deceptive law titles acts like the "Patriot Act", which really should have been called the "Spy & search everyone ACT" or the too “Make everyone’s private information public and pass it around in the N-DEx network ACT" and the so called bill "SOPA & PIPA" pulled from Congress last month, which should have been called the "Keep citizens misinformed, ☭☪ompliant ACT" and to "Stop their freedom of speech from being expressed on the internet, by copyrighting the ©Bills & ©Laws being discussed ACT"? So you see Mr. Obama, A lot of us are not believing in you anymore and these deceptive B.S. / U.S. law titles, like "The Trespass Act" which really should be called "Invisible & moveable property line with an Hitler in the middle ACT" when you read the context within the "The Trespass Act".
So Everyone please sign this Petition @ http://wh.gov/9r0 and share it with your friends, since now is the only hope we have for our President to VETO this un卐constitutional bill and to keep our country ☮Strong and ☮free for You, Everyone & all Future Generations after.
P.S. "Let’s be grateful this Petition did not infringe any copyright "PIPA" ©Laws pulled"
but you don't. you are free range cattle, and every now and then the range is reduced, at the convenience of your masters.
The text of the bill was read several times by the author, included by link in the article, and even reproduced in a subsequent comment. Our interpretation of the law is correct and consistent with that of many constitutional rights lawyers and experts. You'll have to try to sell your pro-regime spin somewhere else, sister.
The three patriots who voted Nay were Paul Broun (R-GA-10), Justin Amash (R-MI-3) and Ron Paul (R-TX-14). The traitors who voted Yea are listed here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-149
I gave you the link. Click it to see their votes.