Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (118219)	10/26/2007 11:36:22 AM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362386

is she Lieberman's sister? What a lunatic biatch.

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (118219)	10/26/2007 2:09:19 PM
From: SiouxPal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362386

What's the URL for that?

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (118219)	10/27/2007 5:53:52 PM
From: Ron	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362386

Thought Crimes Bill- Passed by the US House Now goes to the Senate: "Thought Crimes" legislation which was passed this week by the House. Called "H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Hometown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" the bill has many chilling aspects which could be interpreted as a coalition effort by the unitary party system in the District of Corruption to make third-party opposition and strong support for our beloved Constitution unacceptable and criminal. I will admit to mixed feelings on this one: On the one hand, the bill specifically says "violent" and "violence" and being a pretty laid-back guy, who is all about peaceful change, I want to believe that this kind of anti-terrorism bill makes sense. But, on the other, I've seen 58 years of creeping Big Government and can see how this is just another steppingstone to the disarming of America a so that the coalition of corporations and government can order us how to live our lives, including the takeover of private property along the communist model (eminent domain was a step on this front). The corpgov logic that I'm sure will follow will go something like this: You don't need a gun because we have a safe country, so therefore if you own a gun you must be a terrorist. Constitutional rights to "Keep and bear arms" (not to mention the fine sports of hunting and marksmanship) are at risk when weak-minded legislators play political pile-on. If you go to any of those fund raising coffee hours for the incumbents this fall, ask 'em to explain why such a broadly worded and potentially abuse prone bill could be acceptable. When they try to weasel out of a straight answer (imagine that!) hold up a fair-sized campaign contribution for a yes or no answer. It'll give you some insight into their feelings. I will be calling my state's congressional delegation this coming week to voice opposition to the bill. As I read it, the main thrust of it is "feel good" legislation which could be easily abused. It's already a crime to plot violence against government, and this bill's reference to the internet is, to my reading, an incredibly dangerous and a blatant attempt to squelch dissent on the web. urbansurvival.com govtrack.us govtrack.us