Showing posts with label 1st amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1st amendment. Show all posts

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Christianity & gun owners in the crosshairs: Chilling tactic exposed

Canada Free Press

If you are an outspoken Christian in America, you need to be concerned. If you are an outspoken Christian in America who happens to be a gun owner, you need to be very concerned.  And if you are a Christian gun owner who disagrees with the Progressive anti-Christian agenda in America and have a platform to inform others, you better believe that you are under intense scrutiny. Sound like paranoid propaganda? Read on.

It’s one thing to say that there is a war against Christianity and an active agenda to disarm Americans, but it’s another thing altogether to watch it unfold, up close and personal.  And yet another to actually document an insidious but effective tactic that is presently being used to silence and disarm Christians right here in America. In this report, I will expose a new tactic being used by the atheistic communist supporters of the Obama regime to silence Christian critics and to disarm them at the same time.-[Full Article]

Friday, October 28, 2011

Woman Fired for Speaking the Truth About Zionism

“Patricia McAllister, I’m here representing myself but I do work for the Los Angeles Unified School District. I think that the Zionist Jews who are running these big banks and our Federal Reserve — which is not run by the federal government — they need to be run out of this country.”






Please Sign the Petition to Reinstate Patricia McAllister's Teaching Position

1st Amendment Rights for Freedom of Speech
Why this is Important

Reinstate Patricia McAllister's position as a Substitute Teacher. She is not anti-semitic, she is just a very honest person. Ms. McAllister honestly believes that the Zionist Jewish bankers of the Federal Reserve Bank, should transfer the control of the printing of America's money over to the Congress. The Federal Reserve Bank is illegal, because the Constitution states that the Congress is the only entity that should print America's money.

Also, on Thursday, Ocober 27, 2011, Ms. McAllister discovered that she was also fired from her second teaching position. For six years, Ms. McAllister also worked for the Los Angeles Office of Education. She taught in juvenile camps and halls. Many of those youth are locked up for murder, robbery, and other such crimes.

Ms. McAllister's 1st Amendment Rights for Freedom of Speech has been violated.

Visit Ms. McAllister's website about the Federal Reserve at http://www.zionistjewfedreserve.com

Sunday, May 1, 2011

3 men arrested for reading Bible
'The purpose appears to have been to censor them'

World Net Daily

A lawsuit has been filed in California to protect the rights of three men who were arrested after being accused of "impeding an open business" even though the "business" was the local department of motor vehicles, and it was closed.

Oh, and the men were standing at least 50 feet from the entrance, impeding no one, according to the case that has been filed on behalf of the three men by the Advocates for Faith and Freedom....

The arrests happened on Feb. 2, 2011, when the assistant pastor from Calvary Chapel of Hemet and two church elders went to the public property. Mackey then started reading the Bible aloud.

Listen to an audio report of the situation in California

He was arrested less than 30 minutes later, and the two others were arrested a short time after that, even though they had not actually been reading the Bible aloud.

The men believed they had a First Amendment right to free speech and they were standing in a planter in the parking lot and were on public property.

A member of the California Highway Patrol approached Mackey, grabbed his Bible and arrested him. Then Coronado and Flores asked the officer, "What law was he breaking?"...




[Full Article]

Monday, April 4, 2011

Lindsey Graham Advocates Killing First Amendment

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
April 4, 2011

In response to the idiotic and pointless burning of the Koran by a Florida pastor and the deadly riots that followed in Afghanistan, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has proposed limiting the First Amendment.



“I wish we could find a way to hold people accountable. Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war,” Graham told CBS’ Bob Schieffer on Sunday.

Graham mentioned government censorship of the First Amendment during the Second World War. FDR signed Executive Order 8985 in December of 1941 and established the Office of Censorship. The order gave a legion of bureaucrats “absolute discretion” over the exercise of the First Amendment and the free speech of all Americans.

In the years following FDR’s decree, the government attempted to squelch free speech a number of times for political reasons, most notably in regard to the Pentagon Papers. During Bush Senior’s invasion of Iraq in 1991, the Pentagon revisited wartime censorship and prevented journalists from independently reporting the news. Bush and Reagan tightly controlled the flow of information during the invasions of Panama and Grenada.

In 2004, then vice president Dick Cheney outlined what Americans should expect henceforth – a war against shadowy enemies that will last generations.

President Bush went so far as to tell NBC’s Matt Lauer it was possible the war could never be won, while Democrat John Kerry said terror would probably never be done away with, but that it might be reduced to a “nuisance.”

Lindsey Graham Advocates Killing First Amendment burnkoranday

Graham reminded us that our rulers have in mind a forever war not unlike the one envisioned by Joe Haldeman in his Hugo-winning 1976 novel by the same name. It is said Haldeman wrote the science fiction novel in part as an antiwar response to Robert Heinlein’s fascistic Starship Troopers. Haldeman served in Vietnam.

It seems Graham and his neocon fellow travelers are in agreement with Heinlein’s premise in the novel that social responsibility requires being prepared to make individual sacrifice, especially when humanity is engaged in a never-ending “Bug War.” A character in the novel, Colonel Dubois, specifically criticizes the Declaration of Independence as naïve and unrealistic.

According to neocon globalist faction, our once proud heritage of liberty and its reflection in the Bill of Rights has “no contemporary relevance,” as Georgetown University law professorRandy Barnett noted in 2007. “Sure it was fine that persons should be secure in their papers and effects back in the old days when there wasn’t a danger of terrorism and mass murder,” said the professor in regard to the Fourth Amendment. It is “archaic [and] we don’t need it anymore.” Strangely, Mr. Barnett is considered a libertarian.

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s cavalier attitude regrading the First Amendment and its imagined subservience to the dictates of an undeclared war against enemies largely manufactured by government is once in vogue now that a Democrat president has attacked yet another faction of officially designated Muslim enemies.

Installed puppet Hamid Karzai – a former advisor for the transnational Unocal – has demanded our representatives draft a resolution condemning the free speech of Florida pastor Terry Jones, who unwisely burned the Koran in order to make a political statement.

The First Amendment was drafted specifically to protect political speech. The cherished idea of true sovereigns free to speak their minds, however, soon withered under attack – beginning with the Alien and Sedition Acts passed in 1798 by the Federalists – and has continued on and off until this day.

“Ten to 20 people have been killed,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “We’ll take a look at this of course. As to whether we need hearings or not, I don’t know.”

It is wholly predictable that the government will spend its time and our money – or the money they borrow – to condemn an individual who has managed to offend the medieval religious sensibilities of people who kill Christians and burn churches. Seven UN workers in the Afghan town of Mazar-e Sharif died Friday during riots. Mr. Jones may have outraged millions of people, but he did not kill anybody.

Congress has yet to condemn Muslims in Afghanistan who have burned the U.S. flag and torched an effigy of Obama. According to MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, who filled in for Chris Matthews the other day, burning the Koran is far worse than burning the U.S. flag.

Of course, Muslims have all the right in the world to burn the U.S. flag and burn Obama in effigy – so long as they own the flag and the materials they used to patch together Obama’s likeness.

Terry Jones, according to no shortage of Congress critters, does not have this right, even though his country has a Constitution its Congress has sworn to uphold and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic.


Sunday, January 9, 2011

Sheriff blames free speech as likely cause of Arizona massacre

In a press conference held hours after a deadly massacre in Arizona, Pima County Sheriff Clarence W. Dupnick targeted free speech as a likely cause of Saturdays shooting. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was having a public event when 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner reportedly approached the crowd and shot 19 people, killing Federal Judge Judge John McCarthy Roll and five others, including a young girl...

[Full Article]

Monday, July 26, 2010

Freedom of photography: Police, security often clamp down despite public right

A few weeks ago, on his way to work, Matt Urick stopped to snap a few pictures of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's headquarters. He thought the building was ugly but might make for an interesting photo. The uniformed officer who ran up to him didn't agree. He told Urick he was not allowed to photograph federal buildings.

Urick wanted to tell the guard that there are pictures of the building on HUD's Web site, that every angle of the building is visible in street views on Google Maps and that he was merely an amateur photographer, not a threat. But Urick kept all this to himself.

(Examples of photos that got people in trouble with the police)

"A lot of these guys have guns and are enforcing laws they obviously don't understand, and they are not to be reasoned with," he said. After detaining Urick for a few minutes and conferring with a colleague on a radio, the officer let him go.

Courts have long ruled that the First Amendment protects the right of citizens to take photographs in public places. Even after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, law enforcement agencies have reiterated that right in official policies.

But in practice, those rules don't always filter down to police officers and security guards who continue to restrict photographers, often citing authority they don't have. Almost nine years after the terrorist attacks, which ratcheted up security at government properties and transportation hubs, anyone photographing federal buildings, bridges, trains or airports runs the risk of being seen as a potential terrorist...

[Full Article]

Monday, July 19, 2010

Growing Number of Prosecutions for Videotaping the Police

That Anthony Graber broke the law in early March is indisputable. He raced his Honda motorcycle down Interstate 95 in Maryland at 80 mph, popping a wheelie, roaring past cars and swerving across traffic lanes.

But it wasn't his daredevil stunt that has the 25-year-old staff sergeant for the Maryland Air National Guard facing the possibility of 16 years in prison. For that, he was issued a speeding ticket. It was the video that Graber posted on YouTube one week later -- taken with his helmet camera -- of a plainclothes state trooper cutting him off and drawing a gun during the traffic stop near Baltimore.

In early April, state police officers raided Graber's parents' home in Abingdon, Md. They confiscated his camera, computers and external hard drives. Graber was indicted for allegedly violating state wiretap laws by recording the trooper without his consent.

Arrests such as Graber's are becoming more common along with the proliferation of portable video cameras and cell-phone recorders. Videos of alleged police misconduct have become hot items on the Internet. YouTube still features Graber's encounter along with numerous other witness videos. "The message is clearly, 'Don't criticize the police,'" said David Rocah, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland who is part of Graber's defense team. "With these charges, anyone who would even think to record the police is now justifiably in fear that they will also be criminally charged."

Carlos Miller, a Miami journalist who runs the blog "Photography Is Not a Crime," said he has documented about 10 arrests since he started keeping track in 2007. Miller himself has been arrested twice for photographing the police. He won one case on appeal, he said, while the other was thrown out after the officer twice failed to appear in court.

"They're just regular citizens with a cell-phone camera who happen to come upon a situation," Miller said. "If cops are doing their jobs, they shouldn't worry."...

[Full Article]

Saturday, June 12, 2010

Austin Mother Of Five Gets FBI Visit For Exercising First Amendment

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 11, 2010

In his book Friendly Fascism, author Bertram Gross argues that when fascism comes to America it will be “friendly” and lack the overt brutality of the classic varieties of German and Italian fascism.

Richard Nixon once said that average American is like a child in the family.

Nixon was merely expressing the dominant opinion of the ruling elite who consider us contemptible children in need of adult supervision. Hitler, too, considered the German people children in need of adult supervision.

For the elite, a political activist is the worst sort of unruly child, one that directly challenges the authority of the father who represents the state. In order to modify the behavior of a rebellious child the state must instill fear. It must intimidate but — as Gross noted — it must do this with a friendly face. It must uphold the pretense of “democracy.” A frog must be boiled slowly.

“No truly sophisticated proponent of repression would be stupid enough to shatter the facade of democratic institutions,” wrote Murray B. Levin.

Naked brutality is reserved for al-Qaeda patsies, Iraqi children, Afghan wedding parties, Pakistani villagers, and on occasion those of us who directly challenge the state through armed resistance and self defense. Ed Brown, Randy Weaver’s wife, David Koresh and the incinerated children of Waco come to mind.

In the video below, agents of friendly fascism — who resemble a insurance salesman and his dowdy wife — visit a woman in Austin, Texas, and attempt to ask a few friendly questions about her rebellious behavior during a pro-Palestinian demonstration. Her rebellion did not consist of bomb-making or even inappropriate jokes about the president. Her crime was to display organized outrage over the murder and mistreatment of an entire people, a crime supported by and paid for by the U.S. government.

The FBI agents asked: Did she know anybody who would engage in violence or property damage? In other words, does she admit to being a terrorist and does she know of any terrorist plots ongoing?

At first glance, this line of questioning seems patently absurd. But it has a deeper purpose unstated and denied by the FBI — to inculcate fear of the state and intimidate and modify the behavior of an unruly and rebellious child. It is a routine designed to shut down opposition and discourage troublemakers from exercising their First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

Government will decide what is appropriate and what verges on a crime against the state. The First Amendment now has circumscribed areas of practice surrounded by men in black ski masks and Darth Vader storm trooper uniforms.

The intimidation process did not work on this brave woman. She knows her rights and she was not afraid to tell the FBI in a polite way to shove it where the sun does not shine.


Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Internet Censorship Alert! Alex Jones Exposes Agenda to 'Blacklist' Dissenting Sites and License Users

The Western world, from Australia to the United States, UK and parts of Europe, are moving in a unified front toward dictatorial Internet censorship. Australia has led the way, despite outcry from its populace, by “filtering” out certain banned content. In the United States, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, in continuing his family’s tradition of oppressing free humanity, has pushed forward Cybersecurity legislation that has already passed the House. He has done so in the name of warding off ghastly cyber “attackers” conceivably fronting for al Qaeda while ushering in a means to restrict free speech and expression online for the general population...

Monday, February 8, 2010

Think Government is Corrupt? You May Face 10 Years in Jail

Subversives who think government is corrupt and should be controlled by the people face 10 years in prison and a $25,000 dollar fine if they fail to register with authorities in South Carolina, in another chilling example of how free speech and dissent is being criminalized in America...

Friday, January 15, 2010

Obama's Favorite for Supreme Court Justice Sunstein Wants to Ban Guns, Free Speech

Regulatory Czar has already been tapped for senior position


Cass Sunstein, president Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and the man who outlined a plan for the government to infiltrate “conspiracy groups” in order to undermine them, is in direct line for a promotion to Supreme Court Justice.

Sunstein, already in an advanced position of power in the White House as Regulatory czar, has already called for strict restrictions on gun ownership, an internet “Fairness Doctrine”, and an effective ban on free speech where dissenting opinions to those of the government are expressed...