Global Research, January 24, 2007 Bill would allow rounding up and imprisoning of non-registered political writers Steve Watson Infowars.net Thursday, January 18, 2007 You'd be forgiven for thinking that it was some new restriction on free speech in Communist China. But it isn't. The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress in the latest astounding attack on the internet and the First Amendment. Richard A. Viguerie, Chairman of GrassrootsFreedom.com, a website dedicated to fighting efforts to silence grassroots movements, states: "Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill currently before the Senate, would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report quarterly to Congress the same as the big K Street lobbyists. Section 220 would amend existing lobbying reporting law by creating the most expansive intrusion on First Amendment rights ever. For the first time in history, critics of Congress will need to register and report with Congress itself." In other words Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats may redefine the meaning of lobbying in order that political communications to and even between citizens falls under the same legislation. Under current law any 'lobbyist" who 'knowingly and willingly fails to file or report." quarterly to the government faces criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year. The amendment is currently on hold. This latest attack on bloggers comes hot on the heels of Republican Senator John McCain's proposal to introduce legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. McCain's proposal is presented under the banner of saving children from sexual predators and encourages informants to shop website owners to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, who then pass the information on to the relevant police authorities. <img src="http://img9.imagepile.net/img9/614180107mccain.jpg"> Despite a total lack of any evidence that children are being victimized en mass by bloggers or people who leave comments on blog sites, it seems likely that the proposal will become legislation in some form. It is well known that McCain has a distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned. In recent months, a chorus of propaganda intended to demonize the Internet and further lead it down a path of strict control has spewed forth from numerous establishment organs: During an appearance with his wife Barbara on Fox News last November, George Bush senior slammed Internet bloggers for creating an "adversarial and ugly climate." - The White House's own recently de-classified strategy for "winning the war on terror" targets Internet conspiracy theories as a recruiting ground for terrorists and threatens to "diminish" their influence. - The Pentagon recently announced its effort to infiltrate the Internet and propagandize for the war on terror. - In a speech last month, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a "terror training camp," through which "disaffected people living in the United States" are developing "radical ideologies and potentially violent skills." Chertoff pledged to dispatch Homeland Security agents to local police departments in order to aid in the apprehension of domestic terrorists who use the Internet as a political tool. - A landmark legal case on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America and other global trade organizations seeks to criminalize all Internet file sharing of any kind as copyright infringement, effectively shutting down the world wide web - and their argument is supported by the U.S. government. - A landmark legal ruling in Sydney goes further than ever before in setting the trap door for the destruction of the Internet as we know it and the end of alternative news websites and blogs by creating the precedent that simply linking to other websites is breach of copyright and piracy. - The European Union, led by former Stalinist and potential future British Prime Minister John Reid, has also vowed to shut down "terrorists" who use the Internet to spread propaganda. - The EU also recently proposed legislation that would prevent users from uploading any form of video without a license. - We have also previously exposed how moves are afoot to clamp down on internet neutrality and even to designate a highly restricted new form of the internet known as Internet 2. Make no mistake, the internet, one of the greatest outposts of free speech ever created is under constant attack by powerful people who cannot operate within a society where information flows freely and unhindered. All these moves mimic stories we hear every week out of State Controlled Communist China, where the internet is strictly regulated and virtually exists as its own entity away from the rest of the web. The phrases "Chinese government" and "Mao Zedong" have even been censored on China's official Web sites because they are "Sensitive phrases". Are we to allow our supposedly Democratic governments to implement the same type of restrictive policies here? Under section 220 of the lobbying reform bill, Infowars.net could be required to seek a license in order to bring this information to you. IF we were granted a license we would then have to report our activities to the government four times per year in order to bring you this information. Does that sound more like free speech or more like totalitarianism? Take action: As well as calling the Senate you should go to GrassrootsFreedom.com which has a petition that you can sign against Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill. Paul Joseph Watson contributed to this report.
Well, a royal **** you to anyone trying to mess with freedom of speech in the United States of America. Thank you for paying attention. You are paying attention, aren't you, people? D&D. Our Ancestors Gave their Blood and Treasure for Our Rights and Liberties. Don't Let Fools on the Hill and in the White House Take Them Away.
what dumbasses....someone with political backgriund explain....wouldnt this violate the bill of rights? or does this surpass that..
Any article that posits Richard Viguerie as a defender of righteousness and gratuitously slams the new SPeaker of the House while complaining about a Senate Bill needs to be read with some skepticism. Here's what RV says: Here's Section 220 of S.1: I don't really see any correlation between what RV is saying and what Sec. 200 says. Fact is, the bills aimed at the freedom bloggers have been filed before... under the previous Congress. I don't know for sure what's going on here, but certainly the particulars don't match the article.
John McCain is an absolute idiot. His disdain for the 1st Amendment is unprecedented. This idea has been thrown around for a while. This is one of those ideas that the Federal Government is bipartisan about: taking rights from anyone not involved in the Federal Government. The Republicans want oversight on the Internet, and the Democrats want the Fairness Doctrine applied to radio. The only people who lose are those outside of Washington. Like it's been said many times, "The only thing Republicans and Democrats can agree on is screwing the public."
Here is the table of contents of the bill. I don't see anything in it that defines a blogger as a lobbyist. TITLE I--LEGISLATIVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2007 Sec. 101. Short title. Sec. 102. Out of scope matters in conference reports. Sec. 103. Congressional earmark reform. Sec. 104. Availability of conference reports on the Internet. Sec. 105. Sense of the Senate on conference committee protocols. Sec. 106. Elimination of floor privileges for former Members, Senate Officers, and Speakers of the House who are lobbyists or seek financial gain. Sec. 107. Proper valuation of tickets to entertainment and sporting events. Sec. 108. Ban on gifts from lobbyists and entities that hire lobbyists. Sec. 108A. National party conventions. Sec. 109. Restrictions on lobbyist participation in travel and disclosure. Sec. 110. Restrictions on former officers, employees, and elected officials of the executive and legislative branch. Sec. 111. Post employment restrictions. Sec. 112. Disclosure by Members of Congress and staff of employment negotiations. Sec. 113. Prohibit official contact with spouse or immediate family member of Member who is a registered lobbyist. Sec. 114. Influencing hiring decisions. Sec. 115. Sense of the Senate that any applicable restrictions on Congressional branch employees should apply to the Executive and Judicial branches. Sec. 116. Amounts of COLA adjustments not paid to certain Members of Congress. Sec. 117. Requirement of notice of intent to proceed. Sec. 118. CBO scoring requirement. Sec. 119. Effective date. TITLE II--LOBBYING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2007 Sec. 201. Short title. Subtitle A--Enhancing Lobbying Disclosure Sec. 211. Quarterly filing of lobbying disclosure reports. Sec. 212. Quarterly reports on other contributions. Sec. 213. Additional disclosure. Sec. 214. Public database of lobbying disclosure information. Sec. 215. Disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive and Congressional employment. Sec. 216. Increased penalty for failure to comply with lobbying disclosure requirements. Sec. 217. Disclosure of lobbying activities by certain coalitions and associations. Sec. 218. Disclosure of enforcement for noncompliance. Sec. 219. Electronic filing of lobbying disclosure reports. Sec. 220. Electronic filing and public database for lobbyists for foreign governments. Sec. 221. Additional lobbying disclosure requirements. Sec. 222. Increased criminal penalties for failure to comply with lobbying disclosure requirements. Sec. 223. Effective date. Subtitle B--Oversight of Ethics and Lobbying Sec. 231. Comptroller General audit and annual report. Sec. 232. Mandatory Senate ethics training for Members and staff. Sec. 233. Sense of the Senate regarding self-regulation within the Lobbying community. Sec. 234. Annual ethics committees reports. Subtitle C--Slowing the Revolving Door Sec. 241. Amendments to restrictions on former officers, employees, and elected officials of the executive and legislative branches. Subtitle D--Ban on Provision of Gifts or Travel by Lobbyists in Violation of the Rules of Congress Sec. 251. Prohibition on provision of gifts or travel by registered lobbyists to Members of Congress and to Congressional employees. Subtitle E--Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act of 2007 Sec. 261. Short title. Sec. 262. Establishment of commission. Sec. 263. Purposes. Sec. 264. Composition of commission. Sec. 265. Functions of commission. Sec. 266. Powers of commission. Sec. 267. Administration. Sec. 268. Security clearances for commission Members and staff. Sec. 269. Commission reports; termination. Sec. 270. Funding. TITLE III--CONGRESSIONAL PENSION ACCOUNTABILITY Sec. 301. Short title. Sec. 302. Denial of retirement benefits. Sec. 303. Constitutional authority. Sec. 304. Effective date. TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 401. Knowing and willful falsification or failure to report. Sec. 402. Public availability of Senate committee and subcommittee meeetings. Sec. 403. Free attendance at a bona fide constituent event. Sec. 404. Prohibition on financial gain from earmarks by Members, immediate family of Members, staff of Members, or immediate family of staff of Members. Sec. 405. Amendments and motions to recommit. Sec. 406. Congressional travel public website.
I got it from the same place Rimrocker got it from. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.1.PP:
I would love to hear the details of this. It sounds more like conspiracy theorist paranoia than anything else. Oh the horrors! They are going to shut down "terrorists"! (why the quotes?)
Well,does the blogger have a choice to which prison he will be sent to? From what I've seen in HBO's OZ,I would rather be taken to Guantanamo bay than to any prison in the USA
Conspiracy theorist paranoia??? Didn't you see the link in the original post? It's from Infowars dot net. That is a totally legit and rational website....
Ha! I did miss that. I didn't see a URL link so I didn't notice it. Those guys are beyond nutty. We had a national security discussion at my grad school that was open the public a few years ago and they showed up and just hounded the speakers with their bizarre questions.
The key here is "Paid attempts." Bloggers who don't receive an income in exchange for their work aren't affected. There may be another side to this - i.e., giving bloggers an undesirable affiliation to lobbyists - but this seems likely to be paranoid hooey IMO. I hope that the "bloggers" who are paid to espouse bull**** propoganda are registered as lobbyists - since they are fullfilling the same function, and disengenuously at that.
