ATTORNEY GENERAL TO CLASSIFY PRO-LIFE, PRO-GUN AMERICANS AS TERRORISTS

ATTORNEY GENERAL TO CLASSIFY PRO-LIFE, PRO-GUN AMERICANS AS TERRORISTS

An amendment to a bill swiftly moving through the US Congress will allow the Obama Administration’s Attorney General to classify Americans as domestic terrorists if they are pro-life, pro-gun and anti-big government.

Impeached Florida judge – now a Democrat Party member of the House of Representatives – Rep. Alcee Hastings introduced what some claim is a disturbing piece of legislation. Hasting’s amendment calls for the Attorney General to have discretion over who is called a terrorist and what groups will be treated as terrorist groups.

“This is arguably one of the worst pieces of legislation to come down the pike in a long, long time. In essence Attorney General Eric Holder – a Bill Clinton retread – will have the discretion to label Americans terrorists. Hastings is a dangerous man and should be forced to resign from congress. He’s also proposed the creation of “emergency camps” that are nothing more than prisons,” warns political strategist Mike Baker.

“This amendment is part and parcel of the trend in this country to suppress dissent by patriots by calling them domestic terrorists,” he added.

In an unclassified report entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” Secretary for Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and her agency included the following description of “extremists:”

“Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

Last Thursday, Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) made the following remarks on the House Floor regarding Congressman Alcee Hastings’ (D-FL) amendment to the National Defense Authorization bill:

"The Hastings Amendment to the National Defense Authorization bill (which now is being considered en bloc) prohibits the recruitment, enlistment, or retention of persons with known affiliations to “groups determined by the Attorney General to be of a violent, extremist nature.”

“Members on both sides of the aisle support the purpose of this amendment because we recognize that there are legitimate concerns about the enlistment of persons who may seek to use their military training to cause harm to innocents, but we should take pause to consider the breadth of this amendment carefully. I just want to express concern about the language of this amendment, and my concerns are shared by many in this House,” said Rep. Franks.

"While the amendment seeks to keep gang members and members of violent groups out of the military, the amendment by its language is much more broad. Specifically, it confers upon the Attorney General the ability to categorize groups as hate groups, and this sounds an alarm for many of us because of the recent shocking and offensive report released by the Department of Homeland Security which labeled, arguably, a majority of Americans as “extremists,” warned Franks.

“I take extreme offense that the federal government – through a report issued under the authority of a Cabinet-level official – would dare to categorize people who are “dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition or abortion or immigration” as “right-wing extremists” and it begs the question of whether the Attorney General, under Mr. Hastings’ Amendment, can look to the Napolitano report to decide who is an extremist, or can make the same categorization of the majority of Americans as extremists who may then be kept from joining the military, or who may be discharged,” said Rep. Franks.

“I want to state unequivocally that I believe that it is not the intent of this Congress to label pro-lifers, federalism proponents, and pro-immigration enforcement groups and their affiliates as extremists under the bill. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle should make a strong effort to assuage these concerns and make our intentions clear. If the intent of this amendment is to go after citizens because of their political views and moral convictions, then the amendment is unconstitutional. I hope that the sponsor of the Amendment will make clear tonight that this is not the intent,” he added.

[b]Rep. Alcee Hastings also introduced what many say is another disturbing piece of legislation. That new bill calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to build at least six facilities that can be designated as "emergency centers. Hastings rationale for such facilities is to gather and “house” civilians on what are basically detention centers guarded by armed soldiers or paramilitary troops.

The House bill (HR 645) – National Emergency Centers Establishment Act – is not even on the radar of members of the elite media. According to critics of the plan, if passed the government will create camps or centers that by their nature restrict the activities of US citizens herded into them.[/b]

In fact, one provision – Section 2 (b) (4) – states: “[To] meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.”

One critic, political strategist Mike Baker claims the idea of such detention center smacks of the type of concentration camps for political dissidents, such as occurred in Nazi Germany, Americans find repugnant.

“Why aren’t the news media covering this story? Could it be because they fear being the first occupants of these so-called emergency installations? Where is the outrage by our nation’s Fourth Estate?” asks Baker.

Hastings bill is suspected of attempting to help expand the President Obama’s military and law enforcement powers. While Hastings pushes this bill, even Republican congressmen are hesitant to remind one another and the nation that this Florida congressman was impeached while he sat on Florida’s federal court bench.

Appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, he became the first African-American federal judge in the state of Florida, and served in that position for ten years. He’s still called “Judge” by some of his colleagues, but one would think he’d rather forget his days on the federal bench.

In 1989, Judge Hastings was impeached by the US House of Representatives for bribery and perjury. The Democratic-controlled Senate convicted Hastings of accepting a $150,000 bribe in 1981 in exchange for a lenient sentence and of perjury in his testimony about the case. Hastings said the charges against him smacked of racism.

Even Rep. John Conyers, who is also black, said he “found no trace of racism during the investigation.” He urged his colleagues to remove Hastings from the bench. He said, “[Hastings] is unfit to serve.”

When the ultra-liberal Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi nominated Hastings for the chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee, even members of her own political party balked.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news152.htm

So as a pro gun veteran I am now going to be classified as a terrorist?

this kind of crap is exactly why the 2A exists.

They are going to create extremists here in the US simply by their own stupidity, yet another reason to go off the grid and abandon society.

Alaska’s a nice place to “get lost”.

Its wierd, Im very proud of my country and dam proud to be and Americain. On the other hand Im ashamed and scared of where this country is heading. For me and my 3 daughters who will have to deal with the aftermath of what happens today in 20 years.

You know, there’s a really, really big difference between “ATTORNEY GENERAL TO …” and “one dude in the House of Representatives added an amendment to a bill that could, if passed without revision …”

Sure it’s a big difference, but if anything can close that gap, it’s the internet!

can someone point out where in that it says ANYTHING about gun owners?

now look, don’t come here with your “fancy logic” and “reason”…

:smiley:

and last i checked, there were some pro life organizations responsible for blowing up clinics and shooting abortion doctors…i think that falls under the category of terrorism.

does anyone else think if something like this passed then this country would basically be like germany during hitlers reign? i bet a historian could find a bill that almost mimics this one passed down which empowered hitler.

Think back to April 19, 1996. Janet Reno and Bill Clinton already classified us as ‘tangos’ in many ways… :confused:

I believe it was the Counter-Terrorism Bill or Anti-Terrorism Bill. Google it.

America was founded by right-wing, pro-gun ‘terrorists’…

DHS “Most-Wanted,” ca. 1776. :mad:

Where can I get that shirt?

Buckaroo

I am not on board. Sorry I may be dumb but I see nothing in that bill that raised red flags for me. Other then I know the way the government works and this will cost me money in the end.

"ENEMIES OF “WORLD ORDER”

Addressing a May 13th [1996] session of the Senate Appropriations Committee, FBI Director Louis Freeh stated that the focus of the federal government’s domestic anti-terrorism efforts are “various individuals, as well as organizations, some having an ideology which suspects government and particularly the federal government, of world-order conspiracies - individuals who, for various reasons, have organized themselves against the United States.” Allowing that action against such groups requires “some indication of criminal activity.” Freeh made it clear that the chief domestic “enemy” consists of “individuals who espouse ideologies inconsistent with principles of federal [sic] government” - in short, right-wing extremism.

The May 13th Senate committee session also disclosed the existence of the previously unknown Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 39, which, according to Freeh, “sets out the responsibilities not only of the FBI, but emphasizes most importantly [inter-agency] coordination, which is required among all federal agencies to discharge the objectives of the federal policy with respect to terrorism.” Freeh noted that “there is particular emphasis in that plan for coordination between the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice” in matters of chemical, biological, or nuclear terrorism, or threats to the infrastructure (highways, power grids, etc.).

Both PDD 39 and recently enacted federal anti-terrorism legislation have led to significant amalgamation of federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Freeh proudly referred to “coordination with our other partners, and particularly our partners in the CIA. We have exchanged deputies at a very high level between the FBI and the CIA in the counter-terrorism areas…The deputy at the CIA’s counter-terrorism center has been and will be…an FBI agent. We have conducted joint training with the CIA, conferencing, operational planning across the board.”

In addition, Freeh explained that the FBI’s new counter- terrorism center “contains representatives of 16 other federal agencies and… is dedicated for the first time to a central collection, analytical point, in the federal government for threats, particularly those regarding domestic terrorism.”

None of the senators expressed misgivings about the consolidation of federal law enforcement, intelligence, and military functions, or about the implications of directing those newly consolidated powers at a domestic “enemy.”

[end]

Source:

The New American
Insider Report, p.7
June 23, 1997

Bush and presumably Obama will expound and expand upon this. No new legislation is required - just “interpretation”, I’m afraid. :confused:

Is that a T-shirt?

http://www.wearagun.com/shirtpages/THE-ORIGINAL-HOMELAND-SECURITY.htm :smiley:

+1000

Enough with the Chicken Little bullshit. And as far as I’m concerned, if somebody calls themselves pro-gun while advocating the use of violence to overthrow civil authorities or calls themselves pro-life and promotes violence against clinics and medical staff providing abortion and reproductive health services, they are fucking terrorists and should be dealt with accordingly.

Montana has had its fair share of extremist nut jobs (e.g. The Freeman, Ted (“The Unabomber”) Kaczynski, and a host of neo-nazi white supremacists skulking through the woods and bullying the locals) and most of us are happy to see them get run out of town on a rail.

ditto

Here we go…:rolleyes:

This would seem apparent.