Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Has HR 347 been discussed?
Do people agree with this? It seems like an infringement on 1st Amendment. Thoughts?
Interesting how this didn't get any media coverage either.
http://www.infowars.com/h-r-347-another-step-in-the-elimination-of-the-first-amendment/
It is fairly obvious Obama and Congress rushed through H.R. 347 in order to curtail demonstrations that will undoubtedly occur during both Democrat and Republican conventions this summer. Also known as the ?Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011,? the bill makes it a felony to disrupt or protest at any place or event attended by any person with secret service protection.
?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,? Michigan Rep. Justin Amash wrote on his Facebook page. ?[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.?
Amash, Paul Broun, a Georgia Republican, and Ron Paul were the lone dissenting voices opposed to this bill, which is being called the ?First Amendment Rights Eradication Act? designed specifically to counter the Occupy movement and other political groups opposed to the bankster regime in control of the Congress and the presidency. Democrats have characterized opposition to the bill as ?a whole lot of kerfuffle over nothing.?
Gene Howington, a guest blogger on law professor Jonathan Turley?s blog, contends that the government deliberately made the language of H.R. 347 vague and overly broad. Howington writes that ?it seems to be a trend that vague or overly broad language could be fairly described as being purposefully adopted allowing ?wiggle room? for Federal authorities to potentially abuse civil and human rights under the color of authority.?
While the recently enacted and also vaguely worded NDAA ?poses a threat to your 4th, 5th and 6th Amendment rights, the newest attack of vague language is aimed at your 1st Amendment rights of Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly and Freedom to Petition,? Howington notes. ?As currently worded, it might as well have been called the ?Federal We?re Too Important To Be Annoyed By Your Protest Act of 2011' or (as described by Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), one of the few Representatives to vote against the bill) the ?First Amendment Rights Eradication Act? because it effectively outlaws protests near people who are ?authorized? to be protected by the Secret Service.?
In 1998, Bill Clinton signed Presidential Decision Directive 62 establishing the National Special Security Events, or NSSE, a directive making the Secret Service responsible for security at designated events, including presidential nominating conventions. Other events under NSEE include summits of world leaders, meetings of international organizations, and presidential inaugurations. In other words, with the passage of this bill, it will now be a felony to protest the G20 and globalist ?trade? summits and other neoliberal confabs where international banksters and their minions plot our future behind closed doors.
Such a draconian restriction of the First Amendment is another step in an effort to outlaw all protest against the government, especially at events where the controllers discuss and finalize their plans to implement world government and a centralized global banking system. The global elite have repeatedly demonstrated their animosity toward the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Taking down the First Amendment ? in addition to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and most importantly the Second ? under the bogus and contrived aegis of a manufactured war on terror amply reveals what they have a mind: a gulag panopticon where resistance is not only futile, but illegal, and where the slaves are disarmed and powerless to effectuate change.
Re: Has HR 347 been discussed?
" Taking down the First Amendment ? in addition to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and most importantly the Second ? under the bogus and contrived aegis of a manufactured war on terror amply reveals what they have a mind: a gulag panopticon where resistance is not only futile, but illegal, and where the slaves are disarmed and powerless to effectuate change."
Yep.
Sad
Yes, thanks Obama
You realize that laws only get passed with Obama AND Congress, right?
Here's a little bit of a more moderate take on it - by the ACLU. Their take: it's only an incremental change, and not a particularly disturbing one at that. Douse the fire in your hair.
(IMHO, the "incremental" change is no biggie. The former law included a requirement that people "know" that they were breaking the law. But that's generally not a requirement for criminal charges - - the axiom "ignorance of the law is no excuse" springs to mind.)
I am the 99%.
They do?!??! I can still blame Obama for gas prices, though, right?
Yes,I'm smiling...I'm a marathoner!
Bloggy McBloggerson
CO Nestie Award Winner-Prettiest Brain-Back to Back!
2011 Bests
5K-22:49 10K-47:38 Half Mary-1:51:50
2012 Race Report
1/1-New Year's 5K-22:11
2/11-Sweetheart Classic 4-mile-29:49
3/24-Coulee Chase 5K-21:40
5/6-Colorado Marathon-4:08:30
5/28-Bolder Boulder 10K
Always.
On the contrary, the D's and R's finally have bi-partisan support for something.