Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 3:40 pm
You last visited June 27, 2017, 3:06 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Attention All Bloggers!


Last Edited: October 18, 2006, 1:18 pm

Your right to freedom of speech has been officially rescinded. Keep your political thoughts to yourselves or risk your lives.


Government Targets American Bloggers As Enemy Propagandists



Military, Homeland Security, Bush White House strategy sharpen knives against anyone critical of the "war on terror"

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | October 17 2006

Recent scientific polls that show around 84% don't believe the government's explanation behind 9/11 and others confirming the fact that support for the war in Iraq is at an all time low have led the Bush administration to sharpen their knives against the new breed of perceived "enemy propagandists," bloggers, journalists and online activists who dissent against the "war on terror." As Raw Story reports, CENTCOM announced earlier this year that a team of employees would be "[engaging] bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information, as well as bloggers who are posting incomplete information." So when you're wasting your time arguing the finer points of the collapse of Building 7 or the quagmire in Iraq with someone who seems unable to grasp basic principles, your foe could well be sat behind a plush U.S. government desk in a uniform. CENTCOM is infiltrating blogs and message boards to ensure people, "have the opportunity to read positive stories,"presumably about how Iraq is a wonderful liberated democracy and the war on terror really is about protecting Americans. The CENTCOM website features a useful section, "What Extremists Are Saying," which provides a full catalogue and showcases the diatribes of US government agents Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi, Ayman al-Zawahiri and their sympathizers - rhetoric that CENTCOM hopes surfers will seek out in order for them to grasp a true understanding for the necessity of bombing another broken backed defenseless country in the name of "freedom." The jaw-dropping hypocrisy of a regime and its military attack arm that has engaged in the most gargantuan of deceit and propaganda purges against the American people then pointing the finger at inquisitive bloggers for "aiding the enemy," is alarming to behold.   President George W. Bush looks up as he signs the Military Commissions Act of 2006 in the East Room of the White House in Washington. The bill effectively nullifies nine of the first ten amendments to the U.S. constitution and ends the "great experiment" known as The United States of America.

The White House has made it perfectly clear that it will target American citizens for propagating information harmful to the interests of the U.S. government and classify them as enemy combatants. This is codified in sub-section 27 of section 950v. of the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Bush's own strategy document for "winning the war on terror" identifies "conspiracy theorists," meaning anyone who exposes government corruption and lies about major domestic and world events, as "terrorists recruiters," and vows to eliminate their influence in society. In a speech given Monday, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a "terror training camp," through which "disaffected people living in the United States" are developing "radical ideologies and potentially violent skills." Chertoff has pledged to dispatch Homeland Security agents to local police departments in order to aid in the apprehension of domestic terrorists who use the Internet as a political tool. How long before influential online writers, bloggers and journalists like Greg Palast, who was charged with aiding the terrorists when filming "critical U.S. infrastructure," are arbitrarily gunned down on the street like in Russia or the newly "free" Iraq? The Bush administration's media mouthpieces have also been mobilized to stereotype any kind of critical thinking as "giving aid and comfort to the enemy," a recent case in point being Fox News' Bill O'Reilly calling for the FBI to investigate the 9/11 Scholars organization for possible ties to terrorist organizations. Will we witness a "night of the long knives" to silence any and all dissent as the official dictatorship is announced or does the chilling effect of simply threatening to treat bloggers and journalists as terrorists go far enough to intimidate enough people to keep their mouths shut? A combination of this chilling effect and moves to license websites, impose "hate speech" restrictions and kill off the old internet in favor of a government regulated, China-style "Internet 2" are the tools in the arsenal of the neo-fascists who wish to continue their domestic and imperial bloodletting under the mandated consensus of total obedience.     

Entry #68


ToddComment by Todd - October 18, 2006, 1:35 pm
Silly left-wing propaganda.
emilygComment by emilyg - October 18, 2006, 1:36 pm
strongly reminds me of another time in my life.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 1:45 pm

It might strike you as "silly". I don't find systematically nullifying the Bill of Rights "silly". "Scary" might be a better word. This isn't a left-wing/right-wing, Democrat/Republican issue...it's an American issue, and the truth is in the laws being passed (by both parties, I might add).
ToddComment by Todd - October 18, 2006, 3:47 pm
Oh please, that's a finge-left conspiracy web site, and a ridiculous proposition. To read anything there as fact is beneath you.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 4:22 pm

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is a fact, signed into law. It is there for all to read and abide by. It is purposefully left wide open to interpretation. Current interpretation of laws is being done by the Legislative Branch of our government, not the Supreme Court as laws were intended to be interpreted and since the Executive Branch appoints those Supreme Court justices, and approved by a Congress whose majority blindly supports their leader, it is a moot point anyway.

I didn't need Paul Watson or prisonplanet.com to explain the ramifications of this Act just like I didn't need tutoring on the Patriot Act and its ramifications on our liberty.

These laws are not for the Common Good, they are for control and power over the Common Man. This is right out of the book '1984'. A constant state of war aids in the control of populations, manipulation of their productivity and ultimate control over every aspect of their lives. Wake up and smell the coffee before it's too late.
ToddComment by Todd - October 18, 2006, 4:32 pm
Rick, the more anyone reads propaganda like that web site, the more they will believe it. For example, anyone without a firm grasp of the facts of 9/11 will read their stories and get sucked in by them. They are supported by nonsensical "scientific polls showing 84%" think there was a 9/11 conspiracy.

You can read the news and make whatever you like out of it, but it doesn't make you correct.

Anyone who spends time learning about warefare knows that part of it is not just blowing things up -- it's called "psych-ops", and it's designed to attack an enemy from different sides without firing a shot. Since most information is disseminated on the Internet, I would be shocked if the government did not try to attack the enemy that way too.

For you to make the jump from psych-ops to "GOVERNMENT ATTACKS BLOGGERS!" is your own private quandry you will obviously need to live through before you see through the conspiracy theory. Stop drinkin' that Kool Aid.
Comment by LOTTOMIKE - October 18, 2006, 4:33 pm
thanks rick.i'm already planning a party for '08 when the door hits bush in the butt on the way out.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 4:59 pm
Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes triable by military commissions - includes the following definition.

"Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct."

This is an interesting subsection. If I say the war in Iraq is wrong, am I in breach of an allegiance to the United States as it could be percieved as "knowingly and intentionally" aiding terrorists just because I don't agree with their policy? Am I a co-belligerent because I think they are wrong?

This statement is intentionally vague as to its definitions. If we give money to our local United Way, and they are subsequently found to have ties to terrorism, are we then guilty of providing material support to their cause? Must we rely on a military tribunal to try our case without habeas corpus and due representation just to prove that we were unknowing contributors to their cause.

There are two classes of people in this country. One, the overwhelming majority, support and love this country and it freedoms.

Two, a miniscule fringe element that want to destroy this country.

Now who should be punished, the overwhelming majority or the fringe element?
konaneComment by konane - October 18, 2006, 5:15 pm
The MSM is going down before bloggers.

Come to think of it I read NBC is facing layoffs, so market pressure is taking its course. Smile.

Agree with Todd, too much Kool Aid, too many tin foil hats writing that stuff.
ToddComment by Todd - October 18, 2006, 5:19 pm
LOL! Love the "tin foil hats" reference -- makes me LOL every time! Those three words sum up what I was trying to say much more succinctly.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 5:33 pm
Konane, I'm not drinking Kool Aid and I wear a Chicago Bears hat.

MSM is going down before bloggers and NBC facing layoffs and market pressure? HUH???

I don't understand that response and its relevance to the topic.

Aren't you concerned that your rights as an American citizen are being stripped away daily in the guise of the perpetual "War on Terror", "War on Drugs", War on (fill in the blank)?

This isn't empty political rhetoric...it's the real deal and flippant party responses don't answer the serious questions we face as a country right now regarding its constitution and its freedoms.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 5:37 pm
I'm not familiar with Todd's and Konane's references to tin-foil hats because I'm not a "party boy". I'm assuming it has something to do with Rush's medicinal deliveries.
konaneComment by konane - October 18, 2006, 6:00 pm
Rick, I don't listen to Rush. His message is a bit more conservative than me and his speech pattern isn't easy for me to follow. I'm a Boortz listener if any. Pleasant voice, is an attorney so any opinions offered are legally weighed, Libertarian ideas, and author of Fair Tax.

Tin foil hats refers to conspiracy hatching people who have nothing better to do than sit around in a puddle of paranoia.

NBC is suffering market losses from being so far left in their agenda reporting masked as news. The big 3 and CNN market shares are down while FoxNews which is fair and balanced is UP. I'm old enough to remember when the big 3 reported news as news like FoxNews does. However, the big 3 have been hijacked by the left which began under Clinton and the FBI files being perused by Hitlary to leverage control over anyone considered in the PC enemy camp. Typical socialist/communist strategy.

We are at war and before when we were at war people held onto opinions until the war was over then voiced them. President Bush being in office has brought out the worst in all the howling moonbats so if there are prosecutions about free speech alleging sedition or treason, I would imagine there might be a couple of former Presidents who can't seem to realize they're has-beens that will be in the front of the line.

To answer you, no I'm not worried about my free speech rights .... I express them on my blog every day.
konaneComment by konane - October 18, 2006, 6:11 pm
BTW Rick I wasn't saying you wore a tin foil hat and drank Kool Aid ..... the writers of what you posted is what my barbs were aimed at. Scaremongers, pure and simple, no logic in those writings except to create panic.

Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 6:55 pm
Thank you, konane for clarifying. I did not know some of those things because those are not my normal sources of news outlets or information (nor is CNN, FOX News, or "Grunge report"). The good thing is that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 speaks for itself and needs no reporters, news channels, bloggers or pundits to interpret it.

True, you are able to speak your viewpoints freely on your blog, but they agree with the regime. The question remains, will I still be able to speak my viewpoints that are against the regime? That has been opened to debate.

Who will be my attorney, the judge and jury in my trial for speaking against this regime? ...a military tribunal? Will my guilt be based on the Military Commissions Act of 2006?

Freedom of speech applies to every single citizen of this country, not just the ones that agree with its current regime. I'm not an enemy combatant and I am furious that I could be deemed as such.

konaneComment by konane - October 18, 2006, 7:18 pm
I believe the military is more concerned with veiled or direct threats to cause harm to elected officials or large groups of people such as acts of war, assassinations, sedition, treason, plots of various sorts, calls to riot, etc.

Unless a specific blog is a watering hole drawing known or potential terrorists for the above it seems there is little to worry about.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 8:05 pm
Konane, What is a veiled threat? A 13 year old girl expressing her displeasure with our president on myspace.com? Visited by Secret Service Agents, pulled out of her classroom, questioned without the knowledge of her parents (who were lied to about the interrogation)....This is Gestapo tactics, pure and simple. Wouldn't these two agents' time have been better served in a place other than a junior high school girl's face? Is this the life you want your children to live in? Ergo, no freedom of speech for you, kids. Imagine what the fourth period class had to discuss in Civics.

"Calls to riot"....so that means no more freedom of assembly?

What exactly are the lines being drawn here? The semantics have suddenly become very important. Please explain. You must have some inside info that we don't. For the love of God can someone on this planet please explain this nightmare???

We are becoming the laughing stock of the world because we are proclaiming democracy and human rights and are abusing every single one of our tenets that we flaunt so boldly to the world as an example right in our own country.
konaneComment by konane - October 18, 2006, 9:00 pm
The girl should have been instructed by her parents what to say online and what NOT to say. Yes, any threat against a head of state merits a quick visit by Secret Service. Period. Children younger than that girl have strapped bomb vests on and blown themselves up, they've also killed fellow classmates in school shootings. Too young to question after posting something that inflammatory, not on a bet.

Calls to riot in the terms I stated were meant to throw the nation into turbulence.

Go to any moonbat hate site, read what is being written that is hateful, calling for the death of someone and you'll know where the line is. You'll know when the line is crossed by the language used.

Actually I don't give a flying flip what the world thinks of the US courtesy of the MSM portraying a totally different picture than how it really is. We are the only nation the world has which represents freedom. We lead our own parade, we carve out our own way, we are the innovators and go where current humankind hasn't gone before. Other nations envy us and that envy, downright jealousy over our nation's accomplishments are the reason we're criticized. If we do as our critics say we should, we're putting them in the driver's seat which is what they wanted in the first place to assume leadership over a self made nation they didn't have to put in the brainpower and hard work to accomplish. Bush doesn't listen to outside critics which is the hallmark of a true leader, and that's one reason I really like him.

Go to any other nation for awhile and you will really be thankful you were born here. I was told by a friend who lived in Europe that you can't just pick up and move, you have to apply for permission. You also have to apply for apartments if you want a different one, and most times the waiting list is months. Think we have it bad here, think again and again once more. You can't have more than one job in Europe and they restrict the hours you work if you're making too much money. Taxes are much higher, average standard of living much lower.

The only reason we fail to appreciate what we have is our anti-US lame stream media wanting to turn us into another European Union with the implementation of the North American Union I've blogged about. Their agenda is that and of the institution of socialism so we'll be subject to Europe again instead of being sovereign and free like we've always been. Freedom flies in the faces of socialists like someone slapping them with a cold dead fish. And jealousy is the motivation behind control they want to excert over us.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 9:30 pm
Konane with all due respect, you will have to define this "MSM" acronym you keep using. I don't have a clue what you are talking about and don't listen to Push Limbaugh for the latest right-wing jargon.

Second of all, I am damned glad I was born here and my family moved to this country in 1680 from Scotland, so do not patronize me about how I should be glad I live in this country. My family and many others like us had a part in forming this country so that people like you could speak freely. None of those people would have condoned jack-booted government agents to pull a 13 year old girl out of her class for interrogation for comments against the president under any circumstances whatsoever!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If YOUR president is so worried about a 13 year old girl's viewpoints on his presidency, then what does that say about YOUR president? You are part of the problem and not the solution. You can quote your "drunges" till you are blue in the face but you will not convince me that you and he are right.
konaneComment by konane - October 18, 2006, 10:12 pm
MSM, mainstream media.

Federal authorities are bound by law to investigate any threat against the president, period. They always have, they always will. Now in the information age we know about when they did and a reporter gets to publish a story about it. That's the only difference.... nothing has changed.

I would expect if I had a child post something like that on a public forum to be seen all over the world that the Secret Service, FBI would be all over my family like white on rice. I would expect my family to remain on the watch list for an indefinite period of time due to a remark of that nature ..... for which the adults in the family are legally responsible.

What she said was light years away from saying that she disagreed with his actions as president and people should vote him out.

13 year olds aren't like they were when you and I were growing up due to their media exposure. In some respects they're more grown up as far as what they're exposed to, but don't have the knowledge or experience to handle it all. They also don't realize what crosses the line into criminal activity, and if they do society has taught them they'll be handled in juvenile court. Juvenile court doesn't apply when someone crosses the line like that girl did.

All bets are off legally and the Secret Service did have the right to question her and will have the right to question anyone anywhere in the future who posts a threat against the president.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 18, 2006, 10:45 pm

Granted, on the right to interview her. From the nature of her comments it was appropriate. I'm not disagreeing with that. It could have been handled better considering the source of the perceived threat and the S.S. agents' conversation with the parents prior to the school intrusion. The end result, he has gained a stronger enemy and she has peers. She wins, he loses. Sure, she and her friends can't vote for ten years but who is she going to vote for when she can vote (assuming we still have that right)? A Neo-Con from the Party that pulled her from class ten years ago? Don't think so. Never underestimate the power of our youth.

What scares me is if I say "I hate the President", can this now be considered treason? In 1997 when you said you hated the President, were you worried that what you said was treason? No, you weren't.

Think about it.
konaneComment by konane - October 18, 2006, 11:38 pm
I don't know what federal laws are regarding questioning minors. They were probably well within their legal right to pull her out of class without consulting anyone. Fed stuff differs sometimes greatly from state stuff.

IF I said I hated the president in 1997 I would not have worried about treason charges but YES would have worried about the Dixie Mafia Clinton is alleged to have close ties to, or whatever other mechanism so many people woke up dead from while he was president. I was YES very concerned about the PC mafia rampant in Washington during that era enforcing the re-education machine.
Rick GComment by Rick G - October 19, 2006, 1:52 am

And I thought my paranoia ran deep. But each to their own. You're worried about the Dixie Boys and I'm worried about the US Gov't. Guess we'll never reconcile that one.
TenajComment by Tenaj - October 19, 2006, 2:57 am
tst tst tst
Comment by LOTTOMIKE - October 19, 2006, 3:37 am
good to see i'm not the only one that is paranoid about the government these days.nope my kool aid wasn't spiked.....
ToddComment by Todd - October 19, 2006, 7:50 am
Ancient Chinese proverb: "Logic falls on deaf ears".
konaneComment by konane - October 19, 2006, 9:33 am
If you're not doing anything illegal then there is nothing to worry about.

BTW, I don't agree with everything the administration does and have covered the unimpeded INVASION ad nauseum on my blog. I dug my heels in as if rooted in place and not giving an inch on that issue. My senators know my feelings on that too because I've emailed them.

Backing up my statement about NBC reorgainizing, I found this article with link this morning ...... "Big changes, job losses coming at NBC News MSNBC to close N.J. headquarters; operations consolidating across division
"The reorganization announced Thursday morning by NBC Universal will mean big changes for NBC News and MSNBC-TV, including job losses and consolidation of many operations at NBC’s New York headquarters, network executives said.

NBC News plans to slice its budget through attrition, buyouts and layoffs — the exact number had yet to be determined, executives said — and elimination of duplicate newsgathering processes. The biggest impact will be felt at its cable network, MSNBC, many of whose operations will move to the home office at 30 Rockefeller Plaza in Manhattan from its headquarters in Secaucus, N.J., which will close." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15305055/

Another case of agenda before news and truth costing them big time.
ToddComment by Todd - October 19, 2006, 10:34 am
True, also look at the huge cuts at the New York Times -- the agenda-setter of the fringe left. Sinking circulation and profits. Seems people don't like left-wing agenda disguised as hard news. They even fired the main editorial editor within the past week, someone who has been there a long time and shaped their radical left editorial page.

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.