HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » It is now a Federal crime...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:10 PM

 

It is now a Federal crime to protest W(ar criminal) Bush in person.

You have seen in another GD thread that Obama has signed a lifetime secret service protection law for himself and W.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022168513

HR347 makes it a Federal crime, if they wish to press charges, to protest where you know secret service are present.

http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=aclu+hr347&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Which also makes this a Federal crime:



It's not Democracy if they don't listen. Democracy translates as "The will/voice of The People."

20 replies, 1697 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply It is now a Federal crime to protest W(ar criminal) Bush in person. (Original post)
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 OP
99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #1
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #2
99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #4
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #9
99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #15
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #16
99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #17
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #18
99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #19
randome Jan 2013 #3
Mr.Bill Jan 2013 #5
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #6
nc4bo Jan 2013 #7
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #8
dsc Jan 2013 #10
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #11
dsc Jan 2013 #12
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #13
TheKentuckian Jan 2013 #14
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #20

Response to Fire Walk With Me (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:14 PM

1. Why is Obama kissing Bush ass? I just don't get it.

well actually I do get it, but probably it would get blocked or banned by
mods if I posted my darkest suspicions about this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:25 PM

2. Why did Bill Clinton chum around and go fishing with HW Bush?

 

....

Just another giant free speech zone oxymoron in which we, the little people, cannot speak truth to power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:41 PM

4. Hhmmm. now let me think ...

maybe because H.W. is not a complete idiot. HW at least had the decency
to hide his crimes from public view most of the time, and did not completely
bankrupt the gov't with 2 unpaid-for wars.

Who knows. We are only left to guess. Why does this not feel like any kind
of democracy anymore?

The US public's views are being nearly universally ignored in DC , on weed,
on unpaid for wars, on social security and medicare, on and on and on, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:48 AM

9. The legalization of any drugs would severely impact the prison-industrial complex.

 

LA sheriff Lee Baca is asking for billions of dollars to build two new jails. Can't have anything getting in the way...including the statistic that some 46% of those imprisoned are there on drug-related offenses. And now there are private prisons promising investors 90% occupancy rates...with our tax dollars funding them!

The "War on drugs" begins to make more and more sense. Financially.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:10 PM

15. Unimpeded, our current trajectory is leading us into a world

where there the only people left are prisoners and prison guards ..
plus a few mid-level tyrants being serviced by "parolees".

Each prison surrounded by factories, kinda like Auschwitz now
that I think of it.

Meanwhile, everyone ignores how Portugal has completely
legalized most ALL drugs and is seeing dramatic decrease
in drug dependency through treatment oriented policies
and uses for public funds, which over-all is much cheaper
for the gov't in the long run especially.

But you already knew that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:21 PM

16. Actually, I'm unaware of the Portugal model. If you have a favorite link, would you please share it?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #16)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:16 AM

17. It's not surprising you have not heard about it.

It's been a pretty well-kept secret since it happened in 2001; but now
there's been enough time to make a sober assessment of how that has
played out, such that even skeptics are beginning to give it a second
look.

Plus with full legalization in Washington State & Colorado , along with all the
medical marijuana states, I think the tide has turned on this. Now even the
fucking Wall St. Journal is pointing to the "Portugal Option" (as part of a larger
article questioning "has the war on drugs has been lost". ...if you can believe it:

"One moderate alternative to the war on drugs is to follow Portugal's lead and decriminalize all drug use while maintaining the illegality of drug trafficking. Decriminalizing drugs implies that persons cannot be criminally punished when they are found to be in possession of small quantities of drugs that could be used for their own consumption. Decriminalization would reduce the bloated U.S. prison population since drug users could no longer be sent to jail. Decriminalization would make it easier for drug addicts to openly seek help from clinics and self-help groups, and it would make companies more likely to develop products and methods that address addiction.

Some evidence is available on the effects of Portugal's decriminalization of drugs, which began in 2001. A study published in 2010 in the British Journal of Criminology found that in Portugal since decriminalization, imprisonment on drug-related charges has gone down; drug use among young persons appears to have increased only modestly, if at all; visits to clinics that help with drug addictions and diseases from drug use have increased; and opiate-related deaths have fallen.

Decriminalization of all drugs by the U.S. would be a major positive step away from the war on drugs. In recent years, states have begun to decriminalize marijuana, one of the least addictive and less damaging drugs. Marijuana is now decriminalized in some form in about 20 states, and it is de facto decriminalized in some others as well. If decriminalization of marijuana proves successful, the next step would be to decriminalize other drugs, perhaps starting with amphetamines. Gradually, this might lead to the full decriminalization of all drugs."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324374004578217682305605070.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:27 AM

18. Extremely interesting, thank you very much!

 

Science has shown that cocaine (much less concentrations such as the crack form) slams open neuroreceptors and then the next dose is naturally less effective, so it takes more and more to get that same effect, etc. etc. etc. We just aren't made for these drugs, at least some of us aren't.

And it's nice to see an article not influenced/neutered by financial interests. Look at all the money spent upon the system attempting to control drugs, whether that was its actual initial intent or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:59 AM

19. Thank you

for a great conversation.

Nice when that happens on DU, or anywhere for that matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:29 PM

3. So if an armed Tea Bagger shows up at one of these events and says, "I'm here to protest"...

...the Secret Service should simply wave them through?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 07:14 PM

5. No, they should only do that

at Ted Nugent concerts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:23 AM

6. Kick.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:38 AM

7. Is this for real?!!

On my way out the door but will read more at the links later this afternoon.

Damn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:40 AM

8. Unfortunately, yes. "Boy in the bubble" time.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:02 PM

10. In four years Obama will be out of office

and racist nut jobs will be gunning for him, and the Congress wisely decided to make sure he has lifetime protection, they also gave that protection to Bush. Every modern President has had such protection prior to Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:05 PM

11. It's it's already there, why change it to include any and all protest, in and out of office?

 

MIC CHECK

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #11)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:15 PM

12. you are conflating two things and being quite disingenuous while doing so

The law passed in 2011, whatever its merits or lack thereof, have nothing to do with the extension of SS protection to Bush past 2019 when he otherwise would have lost it or the extension of SS protection to Obama past 2027 when he otherwise would lose it. The blog entry was a little lacking to be kind, so I really am unsure exactly what the law says or what the potential problems with the law are. But bottom line the law was passed in 2011 and has nothing to do with the law signed yesterday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #12)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:22 PM

13. It's not conflation, it's pure if/then. Protest those guarded by secret service, go to Federal

 

prison if they press charges. Check the ACLU and other commentary; they're lawyers.

Those of us in Occupy are well aware of HR347 as it affects us directly in the extreme, especially if you bring the NDAA into the mix. THAT may be conflating, but we live in a country where the president has twice signed a piece of legislation allowing for the indefinite detention of US citizens without trial or representation. Sort of perks up your ears if you're an activist or journalist. Chris Hedges and others sued the government over it and it was struck down as unConstitutional...but the government had that unConstitutional ruling overturned, and signed it again.

Strange days indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:08 PM

14. Security is fine. The prohibition on protest needs to fucking go.

Don't want to be protested? Stay your ass out of government or don't do things that inspire protest.

The American people have a right to express themselves, even to Presidents current and past.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 01:12 PM

20. Last kick.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread