Important! Must read for ARAs and other potential terrorists and XPOST!

[Guest guest]

Please read this entire article from the San Francisco Chronicle, Cross-post far and wide. I have highlighted the section about "civil" disobedience in the name of animal rights. Sit-ins will be labeled as terrorists. We, who fight for animals' rights, will be labeled as terrorists .... Rule by Fear or by Law?"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist."- Winston Churchill, Nov. 21, 1943Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide

swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of "an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees. According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its goal the removal of "all removable aliens" and "potential terrorists."Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars should not go to

taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question is: What kind of "new programs" require the construction and refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies," gives the executive the power to invoke martial law. For the first time in more than a century, the president is now authorized to use the military in response to "a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or any other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order."The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations,

or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike. Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure "continuity of government" in the event of what the document vaguely calls a "catastrophic emergency." Should the president determine that such an emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he deems necessary to ensure "continuity of government." This could include everything from canceling elections to suspending the Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a single hearing on NSPD-51.U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up with a new way to expand the domestic "war on terror." Her Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (HR1955), which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6, would set up a commission to "examine and report

upon the facts and causes" of so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then make legislative recommendations on combatting it.According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping investigative power to combat it. A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000 "terror suspects" with the number

increasing by 20,000 per month.What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens? The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.Lewis Seiler is the president of Voice of the Environment, Inc. Dan Hamburg, a former congressman, is executive director. This article appeared on page B - 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle source - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/04/ED5OUPQJ7.DTL

[Guest guest]

One thing I don't get...you can be an activist of any sort and not

be a terrorist. For example I can vote for leaders who will support

legislation that protects animal rights and I can tell people that I

don't shop at Staples because they support HLS which conducts cruel

animal testing. So would that label me as a terrorist?

 

, Shannon Morgan

<fortheanmls wrote:

>

> Please read this entire article from the San Francisco

Chronicle, Cross-post far and wide. I have highlighted the section

about " civil " disobedience in the name of animal rights. Sit-ins

will be labeled as terrorists. We, who fight for animals' rights,

will be labeled as terrorists ....

>

>

> Rule by Fear or by Law?

> " The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without

formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny

him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and

is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or

Communist. "

>

> - Winston Churchill, Nov. 21, 1943

> Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans,

the federal government has assumed the authority to institute

martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and

noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional

recourse in the event of " an emergency influx of immigrants in the

U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs. "

> Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of

single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and

Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within

the United States. The government has also contracted with several

companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped

with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.

> According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR

contract is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which

sets as its goal the removal of " all removable aliens "

and " potential terrorists. "

> Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have

complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars

should not go to taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question

is: What kind of " new programs " require the construction and

refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the

union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?

> Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act

(NDAA), " Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies, " gives

the executive the power to invoke martial law. For the first time in

more than a century, the president is now authorized to use the

military in response to " a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a

terrorist attack or any other condition in which the President

determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that

state officials cannot maintain public order. "

> The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just

before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite

imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up

on a list of " terrorist " organizations, or who speaks out against

the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for

citizens and noncitizens alike.

> Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security

Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure " continuity of

government " in the event of what the document vaguely calls

a " catastrophic emergency. " Should the president determine that such

an emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do

whatever he deems necessary to ensure " continuity of government. "

This could include everything from canceling elections to suspending

the Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to

hold a single hearing on NSPD-51.

> U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up

with a new way to expand the domestic " war on terror. " Her Violent

Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007

(HR1955), which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6,

would set up a commission to " examine and report upon the facts and

causes " of so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then

make legislative recommendations on combatting it.

> According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her

colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a

native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping

investigative power to combat it.

> A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the

Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who " engage

in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the

name of animal rights " as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs

could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration

activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment

rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author

Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of

roughly 775,000 " terror suspects " with the number increasing by

20,000 per month.

> What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make

contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own

citizens?

> The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked

power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the

president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by

law.

> Lewis Seiler is the president of Voice of the Environment, Inc.

Dan Hamburg, a former congressman, is executive director.

>

> This article appeared on page B - 7 of the San Francisco

Chronicle

> source - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?

f=/c/a/2008/02/04/ED5OUPQJ7.DTL

>

>

>

>

>

> http://pets.Fortheanimals7/join

> http://www.myspace.com/fortheanimals7

>