Page 1 of 1

Congress shall make NO law

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 3:05 am
by AAAhmed46
What part of "Congress shall make NO law" do these ##### not understand?


I am so goddamn sick of the government telling us what we can and cannot watch.

It *****, because the Senate website doesn't have the roll call. I want to see if Bill Nelson voted for it (Which he probably did), to make sure that he can't redeem himself.

Look, if the "Framers" that you morality police worship meant for there to be limits on freedom of speech, they would've said "Congress shall make FEW laws." NO MEANS NO GODDAMMIT.

My love of being Canadian grows with each passing day.

Really, how do you put up with regulations on this crap down there? They're getting more and more ridiculous.

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 1:33 pm
by Panther
and the same can be said for shall NOT be infringed.

In fact, the entire Bill of Rights simply enumerates pre-existing inalienable Rights granted to us by our Creator. These Rights do not come from government and are not dependent on government for their existence; they belong to the individual regardless. (Including the 9th and 10th Amendments which state that there are more Rights that haven't been specifically enumerated.)

Don't want your kids to see rude, crude, lewd depictions on TV? Turn to something else! Better yet, turn off the ultra-violent and provocative video game you let them play!

Unfortunately, the Bill of Rights has been deemed "void where prohibited by law" by our government. Even though that doesn't remove any of our inalienable Rights, it certainly makes it dangerous to use them. Try invoking one of your enumerated Rights in a Court these days and see how far you get. You can use it on appeal and you can keep appealing all the way to the SCOTUS, but even the SCOTUS has refused to hear egregious Rights violation cases in recent times. SCOTUS is just the same government stomping on your Rights under a different guise.

Since the PATRIOT Act (which is anything but) even if you want to view or read material that is your Right, your actions are being monitored. Perhaps you have an interest in canning vegitables... Be careful because now keeping "stores of food" has been outlawed. Sure, they probably won't come after you for canning some beans or tomatoes, but that doesn't change the fact that they could. So, they monitor what you check out from the library or buy from the book store or rent at the video store or who you call. Maybe it's to watch for "terrorists", but with the technology in place, pointed at each of us, and the newly passed laws that say they don't have to tell anyone they're doing it, and that anyone who knows they're doing it can be arrested if THEY tell you about it... Well, all it takes is for government edict to say that YOU are the terrorist and that's the end of it. You may say it seems unlikely and you may say that government stays out of religion, but when the law was passed making it illegal to store food for emergencies (more than a small minimum amount), a few million Mormons were made criminals at the stroke of a pen. What is your weakness? Who knows... The 9/11 hijackers didn't have guns and they have become very strict about carrying even the smallest sharp object onto airplanes, what's next? Isn't it an "unfair advantage" for someone to have special training in unarmed combat? When is the stroke of a pen going to make anyone who studies or has studied martial arts a criminal? Maybe they won't take you into custody, but will only prohibit you from air travel. So, you drop out of your dojo, go "underground", and your dojo destroys all of it's student records... what about that book you purchased about it? You may not think you have anything to hide now, but it isn't a stretch to realize that you may be persecuted at some point for something that is currently legal, which they have already monitored you on, and which becomes illegal at the stroke of a pen! Comments about the government not being able to create ex-post-facto laws are irrelevant given the fact that they have been doing so without recourse for decades and continue to do so at an alarming rate.

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 7:49 pm
by AAAhmed46
But thte thing is, there is all this censorship technology parents can buy that let kids access certain channels only if a password is inputted, not very expensive really.

Now why not make that a free service with cable and sattelite instead of having direct government control?

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 9:35 pm
by -Metablade-
I have always believed that what the public really wants is what the public gets, or rather, the path of least resistance is human nature, and people generally don't give a rats-behind unless it starts to affect them directly.

~At the end of the day, this is what we got, and this is what we wanted, shown by proof of who we elect, and how we choose to express our personal political power.

How else can one explain the lack of nationwide outrage at the events that have happened and are happening.

....Hey, don't bug me!
I'm watching TV!

Big 'OL Smoking gun!

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 10:32 pm
by -Metablade-
Ol' Dubbya is GOIN' DOWN!
Cain I git an AIMen, brutha!, ... chnology_1

Just to tantilize you

AT&T's Implementation of NSA Spying on American Citizens

31 December 2005

I wrote the following document in 2004 when it became clear to me that AT&T, at the behest of the National Security Agency, had illegally installed secret computer gear designed to spy on internet traffic. At the time I thought this was an outgrowth of the notorious Total Information Awareness program, which was attacked by defenders of civil liberties. But now it's been revealed by The New York Times that the spying program is vastly bigger and was directly authorized by President Bush, as he himself has now admitted, in flagrant violation of specific statutes and constitutional protections for civil liberties. I am presenting this information to facilitate the dismantling of this dangerous Orwellian project.

Heh..More damaging info:

"The (Narus) STA Platform consists of standalone traffic analyzers that collect network and customer usage information in real time directly from the message.... These analyzers sit on the message pipe into the ISP (internet service provider) cloud rather than tap into each router or ISP device" (Telecommunications magazine, April 2000). A Narus press release (1 Dec., 1999) also boasts that its Semantic Traffic Analysis (STA) technology "captures comprehensive customer usage data ... and transforms it into actionable information.... (It) is the only technology that provides complete visibility for all internet applications."

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 10:47 pm
by -Metablade-
For those who this may seem like Greek,
Allow me to break it down.

This essentially means:

The Government is actively spying on the internet, and monitors traffic of private citizens, and actively "looks" for "actionable" data.
They are monitoring phone calls, emails, and any other transmissions on the internet, secure or not.

Big brother is alive and well, and is here, and capturing data on every move the citizenry makes.

Welcome to the future.
Now kiss freedom good-bye.
I predict full impeachment for GB before his term is out over this, and some MAJOR indictments to come down.

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 10:47 pm
by benzocaine
Careful Meta... they watch :evilbat:

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 10:51 pm
by -Metablade-
Laugh if you wish, but this is going to be BIG.

I've just shown you forthcoming proof that your Government has been actively spying on you.
Something we have only guessed has been happening, but until now, had no direct proof.

Who me? You say?
Not little ol me?

PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2006 12:36 am
by IJ
Well, you may think that the bar for impeachment may be a lie about a oral sex, but it may be simultaneously LOWER than a lie about oral sesx and HIGHER than lies about illegal wiretapping and disclosure of Valerie Plame's identity. In part it depends on the climate in Congress, which in both cases is Republican.

Interesting read in The Rolling Stone recently (I found a copy at work):

"The Worst President Ever"

--recaps a poll of historians about who they think flunked the hardest.
--interesting facts such as only one president has had approval levels fall this far before: Nixon preimpeachment
--the Bush promise to restore integrity has seen over 30 officials leave office under charges or over ethics violates, whereas if memory serves it was one with clinton
--casts recent events in a long term perspective, for example, presidents have always sought to build a national consensus on matters during wartime--until now, when the R's demonized the D's as terrorist coddlers
--reminds us that the "uniter, not a divider" took such delicate issues as a questionable vote that got him into office and ran with them as evidence of divine will rather than a chance to mend relationships. Especially interesting was that while many presidents have been religious only one has leaked that he feels his rule was ordained by God, and that because of this conviction he cannot recognize his errors, accept alternative views, or tolerate advice or dissent quite well.
--he came into office with the biggest surplus in history, and he's borrowed more money than every president before him put together.


Everything has its bias... but I have mine, so I loved it.

PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2006 7:54 pm
by RACastanet
My love of being Canadian grows with each passing day.

Really, how do you put up with regulations on this crap down there? They're getting more and more ridiculous.

Sure glad I am not a Canadian. Read this:

'Firearm registry is billion dollar boondoggle' says BCWF

May 22 2006

"The most significant point to come from Auditor General Sheila Fraser's Status Report released today is that Parliament was misled about the costs and problems with the Canadian Firearms Centre," says BCWF Firearms Committee Chair, Gary Mauser. "This is important because if Parliament is to properly evaluate and monitor governmental programs they must deal with reality," he said.

Today, the Auditor General confirmed her 2002 estimate that the net cost of the Firearms Centre to taxpayers is one billion dollars. This estimate does not include the full cost of co-operating departments and provinces; nor does it include the cost of enforcement.

"A better estimate of the total cost is double her estimate, approximately $2 billion to date," said Mauser who has been outspoken in his criticism of the gun registry.

Fraser said she remains concerned about ongoing operational problems of the firearms registry and the accuracy of the information and her finding that the Firearms Centre does not know how many of its records are incorrect or incomplete. In her report today, the Auditor General said her audit had found serious weaknesses in the error checking processes the Centre uses.

The Firearm Centre's second effort at creating an information system remains incomplete and is still not operational despite the costs ballooning from the $32 million that was originally budgeted to the current estimate of $90 million. The first, and highly unreliable, computer information system ended up costing more than $190 million. Mauser, who is a professor in the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies, Faculty of Business Administration, at Simon Fraser University, notes that the Canadian firearm registry is used as a case study in government mismanagement in American business schools.
(Emphasis is mine.)

For the whole story: ... 6&more



PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2006 1:15 am
by Willy
nope this is the whole story! ... 2b&k=26708

feel like dancing in the streets and firing my ak47 into the air :lol:

PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2006 1:57 pm
by Panther
Registration is the first step to Confiscation.

I know a number of U.S. citizens and a number of Canadian citizens who have chosen to move to jurisdictions which do not have any registration requirements. Those jurisdictions also have some of the lowest crime rates. I have heard about coordinated and concerted efforts by some Canadians to make the registry useless by sending in useless registrations... including a number of registrations that have been paid and sent in for politicians and celebrities who support the registration/confiscation schemes! :mrgreen: One of the very telling items is the fact that a large number of Canadian gun-owners have supposedly "sold their guns and let their firearms licenses lapse". Yeah, riiiiiight... sure they sold their guns...

PostPosted: Sun May 28, 2006 6:43 pm
by AAAhmed46