Silence Citizens!

No Compromise Media

Freedom of the Press?

Only if you have nothing negative to say about Obama

Well, well, well, isn’t this special.

by Jim Turner

It now seems that our military is in the business of silencing the freedom of speech of anyone who even dares to speak out against their commander in chief, Mr. Obama.

RALEIGH, N.C. – The U.S. Army plans to prevent media from covering Sarah Palin’s appearance at Fort Bragg, fearing the event will turn into political grandstanding against President Barack Obama, officials said Thursday.

… McCollum said the Army did not want the Monday event to become a platform to express political opinions “directed against the commander in chief.”

What I find interesting [sickening] is that our military leaders, the defenders of the free republic, will not allow a patriot, Sarah Palin, to speak out in support of our troops, while their commander in chief is doing everything in his power to not support the troops he is suppose to be commanding.

How is that for an oxymoron?

Even more shocking is that according to Tom McCollum, military officials do not consider Sarah – the patriot – a politician because she is critical of Obama and his policies in regards to our troops who are in dire need of support in Afghanistan.

McCollum said it’s not clear if military officials consider Palin a politician but noted that she has been critical of Obama while promoting the book. She said in an interview with ABC News that Obama should provide more troops to Afghanistan.

“It frustrates me and frightens me — and many Americans — that President Obama is dithering around with the decision in Afghanistan,” she said.

Who exactly are the military protecting; Obama’s elites and their egos, or the brave men and women over in Afghanistan?

Next Issue with Free Speech

Here lies the issue. If our military, congress and the Obama Administration are truly claiming to support the constitution of this nation which includes the freedom of speech for every single citizen, then why would Obama and his defenders of socialism be dead set on silencing those exact freedoms?

Why would a defender like Mark Llyod ( FCC Diversity Czar ) believe in the silencing of the press?

“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.

“[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance.”

Why would a member of Obama’s team be infatuated with dictators like Hugo Chavez?

“In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution – a democratic revolution. To begin to put in place things that are going to have an impact on the people of Venezuela.

Let me remind you, this is the same Venezuela where Journalists fear for their lives, where they are shot and murdered for their freedom of speech.

A series of violent attacks, including the killing of a newspaper executive, fueled concern among journalists. On June 3, Pierre Fould Gerges, vice president of the Caracas daily Reporte Diario de la Economía, was shot to death by unidentified gunmen.

Why would yet another defender of freedom such as Mr. McChesney wish to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles?

Why would Obama put himself in alignment with these men like McChesney who believes that Marxism is the only way for a society?

Why?

Could it be that maybe this new administration and the one prior ( Patriot Act ) actually do not want you to have your freedoms any longer as they finally believe that now is the time for a real revolution to take place by revoking your first amendment rights that were once protected under the constitution that seems to be fading into obscurity?

Was this part of the CHANGE that Obama has been speaking of by transforming America?

Is this the CHANGE that he wishes to enforce upon each and every one of us who live in America?

Doesn’t this kind of remind you of June 4, 1989 all over again?

Well folks,

First they silence the politicians,
then the silence the media,
then they silenced you…

Yup CHANGE we can all believe in…

Sources

NO COMPROMISE MEDIA

Contributor

And Stinking Christians, We control what you say, Got it!

by Jim Turner

In yet another attempt by the Obama Administration, with the silent help of congress (cowards) , our freedom of speech has never been more at risk at being lost than it is right now.

Why? Because while Americans were sipping back on a cold tall one, watching baseball and eating popcorn, the enemies were hard at work within our nation; diligently striving to remove the very freedoms we Americas have neglected for far too long.

For the first time since the signing of our Declaration of Independence we are now heading directly back into the stone age, to square one; with persecution and tyranny if we dare speak out against the powers that be.

The powers like the OIC, who Obama has stated that he wants to partner with.

The same Organization of the Islamic Conference who:

1. Wants to silence any negative remarks against Islam
2. Wants to enforce strict Sharia Law under the Cairo Declaration.
3. Is the collective voice of the Muslims world.

The U.N. Human Rights Council approved the resolution, cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, yesterday.

It calls on states to condemn and criminalize “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.” It also condemns “negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups,” which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism — which is always the focus of whining by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and other groups about negative “stereotyping” of Islam. They never say anything when people like Osama bin Laden and Khaled Sheikh Mohammed issue detailed Koranic expositions justifying violence and hatred; but when people like Geert Wilders and others report about such expositions, that’s “negative stereotyping.”

And the worst aspect of this and all such measures is that the “Incitement” and the “hatred” are in the eye of the beholder. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as hate speech. The Founding Fathers tried to protect Americans from tyranny by protecting free speech. Now our free speech is threatened, and tyranny will take advantage of that. — Jihad watch

Why on earth would Obama ever do something so anti-American? Well, that is an easy one, because, by the actions he takes, he clearly shows that he hates America and needs it to CHANGE, CHANGE to the ways of Islam-Marxism, all in the name of reaching out to your friendly neighborhood radical that want your mouth sewn shut.

American diplomats say the measure — co-sponsored by Egypt — is part of the Obama administration’s effort to reach out to Muslim countries.

“Egypt’s cosponsorship of the resolution on freedom of expression is not the result of a real commitment to upholding freedom of expression,” said Jeremie Smith, Geneva director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies.

“If this were the case, freedom of expression would not be systematically violated on a daily basis in Egypt,” he said.

Others warned that the resolution appears to protect religions rather than believers and encourages journalists to abide by ill-defined codes of conduct.

“Unfortunately, the text talks about negative racial and religious stereotyping, something which most free expression and human rights organizations will oppose,” said Agnes Callamard, executive director of London-based group Article 19.

FRANK JORDANS (AP) – Oct 2, 2009

Sewn shut for anyone who speaks out against tyranny and evil. How that for appeasement, or should I say CHANGE?

Seems like these days we just keep adding so-called hate crime laws towards anyone who speaks out against Islam, but as long as you are a Muslim, no worries, preach all the hate your peaceful beautiful heart desires towards those fitly dirty Americans, Christians and Jews until your completely content. I mean after all isn’t this what Islam teaches, hate towards anyone who is not a Muslim?

Of course it does as stated by the British Imam Mr. Anjum Chaudri .

Don’t you love the religion of peace, or do they just love chopping block square?

source of hate speech: Killing of Non-Muslims is Legitimate (British Mullah)

I mean after all, when Allah said to smite them at the neck, he wasn’t kidding.

Introduction to Surah 47. Muhammad or Al-Qitâl

4. So, when you meet (in fight Jihâd in Allâh’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). ..Thus [you are ordered by Allâh to continue in carrying out Jihâd against the disbelievers till they embrace Islâm…

Oh vey, there I go again showing the hate they speak and exposing their evil ways, but according to the new wonderful proposed resolution, this would be classified as hate speech even though it puts Islam in its true light, I mean negative light, no I mean true.

I know, I hear everyone telling me, Mr. Turner we have the second amendment, and this will never happen in America! Really? You might have a piece of paper with words on it, but if Obama and the United Nations have their way, that piece of paper might as well be throw into the fireplace and used to warm your house on a cold winters night as it would become worthless in protecting the free speech of Americans in the New World Politics.

6. But why the fuss, some might ask, if we’re protected by the First Amendment? First, if the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech, presumably we are taking the view that all countries — including the U.S. — should adhere to this resolution. If we are constitutionally barred from adhering to it by our domestic constitution, then we’re implicitly criticizing that constitution, and committing ourselves to do what we can to change it.

So to be consistent with our position here, the Administration would presumably have to take what steps it can to ensure that supposed “hate speech” that incites hostility will indeed be punished. It would presumably be committed to filing amicus briefs supporting changes in First Amendment law to allow such punishment, and in principle perhaps the appointment of Justices who would endorse such changes (or even the proposal of express constitutional amendments that would work such changes).

Eugene Volokh
Professor of Law, UCLA

So the question is, is it too late to do anything?

It really depends on you. Are we as a nation more interested in our jobs, cars and boats rather than the freedoms of others, the freedom of speech? Is the me generation to wrapped up in themselves to care about anyone else except themselves? If they answer is yes to either of those question, then I am going to find a cave somewhere and sit this one out, just kidding, I mean jail cell somewhere, because this American is not going to lie down and watch our freedoms being stripped away. Our freedom of speech is most important freedom we have. Free speech is extremely more important than popcorn, baseball and beer; truly I mean it, if we defend this freedom then we keep them all. If we lose this one, then you know how it plays out, just look to the Middle East where Islam flourishes.

You know, I went to bed one night before the elections and I still haven’t woken up. This dream called CHANGE is a real dozy and all I can ask is this; what you going to do when the Taliban come for you? If your answer just happens to be to sit at home in silence, that isn’t going to fix this one this time….

And to leave you with one more thought let’s hear Mr. Pat Condell let it rip.

America Wake up!

Pat speaks; Americans listen!

Until next time, if there ever is one, this is Jim hiding out, um I mean signing out.

Night everyone…

Sources

Dale Hurd.
“Is ‘Islamophobia’ a Worldwide Free Speech Threat?.”
CBN News, September 24, 2009, sec. World News.

Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan.
The Noble Quran.

Eugene Volokh.
“Is the Obama Administration Supporting Calls to Outlaw Supposed Hate Speech?.”
The Huffington Post, October 1, 2009, sec. World News..

Frank Jordans.
“UN rights body approves US-Egypt free speech text.”
The Associated Press , October 2, 2009..

Killing of Non-Muslims is Legitimate (British Mullah), 2006. http://www.youtube.com/

Robert Spencer.
“U.S. co-sponsors anti-free speech resolution at the UN.”
Jihad Watch, October 3, 2009, sec. Free speech..

Wake up, America, 2009. http://www.youtube.com .

Laolu Akande.
“U.S. To Partner OIC, As Obama Welcomes Ramadan Fasting Period.”
OnlineNigeria.com, August 23, 2009.

No Compromise Media

NO COMPROMISE MEDIA

Contributor

Congress Do Your Job; Try These Traitors For High Treason…

by Mr. H

Friends this post is one that I cannot express in words. As I sit and watch the videos below I am sickened about what has happened to our nation under the darkness of night. A CHANGE is happening, and that CHANGE is the transformation of our nation, a transformation that will bring us directly into the grasp of Satan himself, a darkness known as evil.

These individuals who surround and advise Barack Hussein Obama are revolutionaries, extremists, traitors to our constitution, radicals who want nothing more than to bring the demise of our way of life.

Radicals who want nothing more than to have complete control over every facet of our lives.

These pressing times that we face are no longer between Republican, Democrats, Christians, non-Christians. This is about our freedoms being stripped from our hands, from the hands that our fathers have died for.

If we do not take a stand now we will lose this country, not to an economic collapse, but to radicals that have taken over the White House.

Please watch each of these videos below and share them with your friends and family as fast as you can so that awareness can be raised, and the people who are still fast asleep will be awoken and understand what is at stake if any of us continue to sit silent and sleep throughout our days.

Congress have you no shame, have you sold your soul to Satan himself? Speak up and protect the constitution as you swore an oath to do so.

Friends if we sit silent the days ahead will only grow darker.

Please Watch; Your Future Depends on It

The Radical Truth About Anita Dunn

part 1

part 2

part 3

part 4

part 5

Friends please share these videos with every single person you know. This is not about you or me, this is about our future generations and freedom!

No Compromise Media

NC Sez:  Here’s one from the archives.  Obama has spent a million bucks hiding his past.  Gee, I wonder why someone would go to those links?  Does he have something to hide?  Apparently, Obama thinks so!

Sunday, June 27, 2004

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.
The allegations that horrified fellow Republicans and caused his once-promising candidacy to implode in four short days have given Obama a clear lead as Republicans struggled to fetch an alternative.
Ryan’s campaign began to crumble on Monday following the release of embarrassing records from his divorce. In the records, his ex-wife, Boston Public actress Jeri Ryan, said her former husband took her to kinky sex clubs in Paris, New York and New Orleans.

“It’s clear to me that a vigorous debate on the issues most likely could not take place if I remain in the race,” Ryan, 44, said in a statement. “What would take place, rather, is a brutal, scorched-earth campaign – the kind of campaign that has turned off so many voters, the kind of politics I refuse to play.”

Although Ryan disputed the allegations, saying he and his wife went to one ‘avant-garde’ club in Paris and left because they felt uncomfortable, lashed out at the media and said it was “truly outrageous” that the Chicago Tribune got a judge to unseal the records.
The Republican choice will become an instant underdog in the campaign for the seat of retiring Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald, since Obama held a wide lead even before the scandal broke.

“I feel for him actually,” Obama told a Chicago TV station. “What he’s gone through over the last three days I think is something you wouldn’t wish on anybody.”

The Republican state committee must now choose a replacement for Ryan, who had won in the primaries against seven contenders. Its task is complicated by the fact that Obama holds a comfortable lead in the polls and is widely regarded as a rising Democratic star.
The chairwoman of the Illinois Republican Party, Judy Topinka, said at a news conference, after Ryan withdrew, that Republicans would probably take several weeks to settle on a new candidate.

“Obviously, this is a bad week for our party and our state,” she said.

As recently as Thursday, spokesmen for the Ryan campaign still insisted that Ryan would remain in the race. Ryan had defended himself saying, “There’s no breaking of any laws. There’s no breaking of any marriage laws. There’s no breaking of the Ten Commandments anywhere.”

—AP

No Compromise Media

Freedom of Speech Upheld in Golden State – - But Not from Maine to New Mexico
Will Americans Remain Gagged by the New World Order?

by Michael Travis

The governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, signed a law yesterday that will protect American journalist and broadcasters from British and foreign libel judgments and the court rulings of other.

The new legislation effectively negates the practice of libel tourism.

It represents the growing opposition among Americans to Britain’s libel laws, which are in conflict with the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which protects freedom of speech.

The law gives California courts the power to block libel judgments from Britain and Canada which, the state’s Senate Rules Committee say, have “become the jurisdictional Mecca and Medina for the rich and famous”.

The Committee adds its new law would “diminish the chilling impact of libel tourism on aggressive reporting about important international issues.”

The California law echoes one enacted by the state of New York in March 2008, called the libel terrorism protection act, which is the direct result of the Rachel Ehrenfeld controversy.

Dr. Ehrenfeld was sued in London by a Saudi Arabian businessman over her 2003 book on terrorist financing, Funding Evil, which alleged that the man and his family had provided financial support to Islamic terrorist groups.

Though her book was not published in Britain, some 20 copies had been purchased through UK-registered websites and several excerpts had been published online.

Dr. Ehrenfeld, who chose not to defend the action, was criticized by British judge, Justice David Eady, who ruled that she must pay £10,000 to each plaintiff plus costs; apologize for her false allegations; and destroy all existing copies of her book.

The decision outraged many American politicians, journalists and lawyers who believe the British courts are inhibiting freedom of expression.

Dr.Ehrenfeld has also turned into a campaigner on the issue. She wrote an article last week in protest against the plight of Paul L. Williams and Canada’s libel laws.

Dr. Williams is being tried in Canada for statements he made concerning jihadi activity at McMaster University. The suit, he contends, has stripped him of his professional career and has left him financially destitute.

Two other states – - Illinois and Florida – - have enacted legislation to shield people from libel judgments made outside America.

There is also a proposal to create a federal US law, the Free Speech Protection Act, to bar American courts from enforcing libel judgments issued in foreign courts against US residents if the speech/editorial content would not be considered libelous under American law.

The Daily Mail (London) in an editorial that appeared yesterday refers to London as “the libel capital of the world”. It concludes: “Doesn’t it shame us that one American state after another… has found it necessary to pass laws protecting its citizens’ freedom of expression from the book-burning rulings of the British courts?”

And the rise of Islam…

by Mr. H

Back in July a conference was held by an organization with ties to extremist.

The conference was titled, “The Fall of Capitalism and the rise of Islam”. It took place in Chicago, on American soil, and our main stream media sat silent.

Please watch the news report below with Laura Ingraham & Steve Emerson about the Islamists meeting that was held in Chicago.

As reported in the video above, the main agenda of this organization (Hizb Ut-Tahrir) is to destroy our way of life in the west by removing our Constitution and enforcing Sharia law here in the United States and the world.

So who exactly is Hizb Ut-Tahrir?

Hizb ut-Tahrir alumni include 9/ll mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the late Iraqi terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi and would-be Hamas suicide bombers, and the group’s pro-jihadist rhetoric has led critics to label it a “conveyor belt for terrorists.”

…”Hizb ut-Tahrir preaches an ideology that calls for the destruction of the principles that America is founded on,” said Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy. “While their words are protected by our First Amendment, their actions and movement must not be allowed to take hold. The silence of American Islamist organizations like [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] CAIR and [the Islamic Society of North America] ISNA in condemning the ideologies of Hizb ut-Tahrir and their agenda of insurgency in America speaks volumes to their own, albeit, more camouflaged Islamist agenda.” ^[1]

Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Sunni network with reported ties to confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Al Qaeda in Iraq’s onetime leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It has operated discreetly in the U.S. for decades. ^[3]

Hizb ut-Tahrir is an Islamist network that is committed to creating an Islamic Caliphate that spans the globe. The organization is banned in Germany and Russia as well as several Arab countries and targets Muslim children between the ages of 9 and 18. Many compare their efforts to organizations like the Hitler Youth. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, is counted among their alumnus.

“Americans need to be vigilant to not allow Hizb ut-Tahrir to establish a stronghold in the American Muslim Community,” said Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, President of AIFD. “All American Muslim organizations including CAIR (Council for American Islamic Relations) and ISNA (Islamist Society of North America) need to be on the record that Hizb ut-Tahrir’s actions, ideologies and mission are unacceptable to both Americans and as Muslims.” ^[4]

What was their agenda at this conference?

Hizb Ut-Tahrir: Shariah Takes Precedence over U.S. Constitution
Imam Promises to Fight “Until Islam Becomes Victorious or We Die in the Attempt”

Later, the following dialogue ensued between the imam and a member of the audience over whether Shariah or the Constitution should be the supreme law of the land in the United States (click here to see the clip):

… A speaker identified by conference organizers as Imam Jaleel Abdul Adil said that “if they offer us the sun, or the moon, or a nice raise, or a passport, or a house in the suburbs or even a place to pray at the job, on the condition that we stop calling for Islam as a complete way of life – we should never do that, ever do that – unless and until Islam becomes victorious or we die in the attempt. ” (To see the clip, click here.)

Audience member: “Would you get rid of the Constitution for Shariah, yes or no?”

Imam: “Over the Muslim world? Yes, it would be gone.”

Audience Member: And so if the United States was a Muslim world, the Constitution would be gone?”

Imam: “If the United States was in the Muslim world, the Muslims who are here would be calling and happy to see the Shariah applied, yes we would.”

Audience Member: “And the Constitution gone. That’s all.”

Imam: “Yes, as Muslims they would be long gone.”

While Hizb ut-Tahrir’s controversial message attracted demonstrators and some media attention, the group at least is open about its ambitions. It not only is determined to destroy capitalism — it would shred the United States Constitution as well in favor of Shariah law ^[1]

In addition, we have others in the United States who are not part of this organization, but rather individuals handpicked by Mr. Obama who see no problem with implementing Shariah Law in certain cases within the confines of the United States judicial system.

JUDGES should interpret the Constitution according to other nations’ legal “norms.” Sharia law could apply to disputes in US courts. The United States constitutes an “axis of disobedience” along with North Korea and Saddam-era Iraq.

Those are the views of the man on track to become one of the US government’s top lawyers: Harold Koh.

A New York lawyer, Steven Stein, says that, in addressing the Yale Club of Greenwich in 2007, Koh claimed that “in an appropriate case, he didn’t see any reason why sharia law would not be applied to govern a case in the United States.” ^[2]

Final Thoughts

If we look to Europe with the issue they face in regards to Islamofascism, we here in the United States better be extremely diligent on how we handle these organization that are located within our borders for if we do not we will be looking straight into a mirror and what we see unfold in England will happen here in America. If we truly enjoy our way of life, and wish to keep our Constitution in tact, we need to make sure that everyone understands the ideologies behind these organization and what they would like to enforce upon the America people.

The longer we sit silent, the more damage they can and will inflict.

Remember this:

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
(Edmund Burke)

It is time that the good men and women of this nation, the United States of America, stand up and start taking our rights back, the rights that were given to us by our founding fathers on a document titled, “The Constitution”.

And if my memory serves me correctly the constitution is still the law of the land, so stop acting as if it isn’t, and use your constitutional rights, and SPEAK OUT!

Source

1. Hizb Ut-Tahrir: Shariah Takes Precedence over U.S. Constitution
   Imam Promises to Fight “Until Islam Becomes Victorious or We Die in the Attempt”
   http://www.investigativeproject.org
2. OBAMA’S MOST PERILOUS LEGAL PICK
   http://www.nypost.com
3. Islamic Supremacist Group Holds First U.S. Conference
   http://www.foxnews.com
4. Jihadist Indoctrination Group Recruiting in Chicago
   http://www.aifdemocracy.org

Since you wont agree, I will shut you up;  I Obama will have control!

by Mr. H

In our ever increasing time of governmental control from our current administration, it now seems that he wants to pass yet another bill that will keep the voice of the American people that speak out against his agendas silent by taking control of the internet when he deems necessary.

A pair of bills introduced in the U.S. Senate would grant the White House sweeping new powers to access private online data, regulate the cybersecurity industry and even shut down Internet traffic during a declared “cyber emergency.”

Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., are both part of what’s being called the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, which would create a new Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor, reportable directly to the president and charged with defending the country from cyber attack.

… plans to grant the Secretary of Commerce access to all privately owned information networks deemed to be critical to the nation’s infrastructure “without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access.”

Privacy advocates and Internet experts have been quick to sound the alarm over the act’s broadly drawn government powers.

…such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy.

“The whole thing smells bad to me,” writes Larry Seltzer in eWeek, an Internet and print news source on technology issues. “I don’t like the chances of the government improving this situation by taking it over generally, and I definitely don’t like the idea of politicizing this authority by putting it in the direct control of the president.” ^{[ 1 ]}

Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.

…Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.

The new version would allow the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat.
Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.

“I think the redraft…remains troubling due to its vagueness,” said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance…

…“It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.” ^{[ 2 ]}

This is yet another attempt, in which Obama and his administration, wishes to remove your freedoms as he continues to show no regard for any of our constitutional rights provided to us by our founding fathers.

“It’s an incredibly broad authority,” CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim told the Mother Jones news website, troubled that existing privacy laws “could fall to this authority.”

Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Mother Jones the bill is “contrary to what the Constitution promises us.”

…granting the Department of Commerce oversight of the “critical” networks, such as banking records, would grant the government access to potentially incriminating information obtained without cause or warrant, a violation of the Constitution’s prohibition against unlawful search and seizure.

“What are the critical infrastructure networks? The examples provided are ‘banking, utilities, air/rail/auto traffic control, telecommunications.’ Let’s think about this,” writes Seltzer. “I’m especially curious as to how you take the telecommunications networks off of the Internet when they are, in large part, what the Internet is comprised of. And if my bank were taken offline, I would think about going into my branch and asking for all of my deposits in cash.”

S. 778, which would establish the Office of the National Security Advisor, and S. 773, which provides for developing a cadre of governmental cybersecurity specialists and procedures, have both been read twice and referred to committee in the Senate. ^{[ 1 ]}

An overview of what we can expect if these bills S.778 and S.773 ever become law.

Obama Wants Control over the Internet
http://www.obamabeenlying.com

• Permits the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a “cybersecurity” emergency
• President to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” in regards to “non-governmental” networks and do whatever they feel is necessary.
• Include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals”
• Requirement that some computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded a cybersecurity professional license
• Section 201: permits the president to “direct the national response to the cyber threat” if necessary for “the national defense and security.”
• White House will engage in “periodic mapping” of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies “shall share” requested information with the federal government.
• “Cyber” is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks
• If your company is considered “critical”, you get regulated. Who you can hire, what info you must disclose, and when the government can take control of your computers and network

Michael Savage on these Bills

source Michael Savage

Final Thoughts

This administration has already proven that they cannot be trusted, just look to the health care bill, cash for clunkers and every other agenda this man wishes to pass on the citizens of this nation. His goals, by the actions in which he takes, is to strip each and every one of us of the freedoms that have been afforded to us under the Constitution of the United States. The same Constitution they swore an oath to protect.

We must come together as one nation under God, and let our voices be heard.

We must make certain that every single congressmen and women who refuses to support our Constitution will be voted out of office come election time.

I say enough is enough, and I urge each and every one of you to call your congressmen and women today and let your voice – Your American Voice “be heard”.

Sources

1. Will bill give Obama control of Internet?
   Proposed new powers called ‘drastic federal intervention’
   By Drew Zahn
   http://www.wnd.com
2. Bill would give president emergency control of Internet
   by Declan McCullagh
   http://news.cnet.com

Dictatorship in the USA?

by Mr. H

First let’s listen to the concerns of Mr. Ron Paul

Things to think about

1. min 0:25 Martial law can be declared for as little as to restore public order.
2. min 0:47 New law allows president to circumvent the restrictions of both laws.
3. min 1:07 Martial law can be declared for:
   • Natural disaster
   • Public health reason
   • Terrorist Attacks
   • Or vague reason called other conditions
4. min 1:25 President can call national guard without congressional approval or the government’s approval and even send state guard troops to other states.

Now we will turn our ears to the concerns of Glenn Beck.

Aired today, August 27th 2009.

Glenn Beck asks, no one answers

Questions asked

1. Now let’s listen to what Obama has to say, min 1:00; Civilian National Security Force just as strong and well funded as the military.
2. min 2:05 Why is a force needed when you have internal threat?
3. min 2:35 Who are we fighting?
4. min 3:00 Not the border.
5. min 3:13 Not Islamic extremist as according to Obama we are not a war with Islamic extremist anymore.
6. min 3:54 Is it us, we the people; people that believe in the Constitution?
7. min 7:20 Who builds an army against an unknown threat? Who?

Well folks, these are the issues, now will someone from the White house please give us, the citizens of the United States of America, the answers.

JOIN US IN WASHINGTON DC SEPT. 12, 2009 FOR THE ULTIMATE TEA PARTY!