Main menu

Quietly Outlawing Dissent

(originally launched into cyberspace on 02/02/2008)

Dear Subscriber,

Trying to keep people updated on all the totalitarian garbage which
the federal government is spewing out these days is a little like
trying to count snowflakes in a blizzard. Nonetheless, there is one
particularly fascist tidbit that I want to point out. John Conyers,
that devout nationalist socialist and hater of freedom, has
proposed a bill that pretends to protect federal judges from
violent meanies. However, the proposed law contains a provision
which outlaws the publishing of "personal information" of any judge
or law enforcement officer "with the intent to cause harassment
[or] intimidation."

With such broad wording, what immediately came to your mind? I
immediately thought of our letter-writing campaigns to all manner
of federal "authorities." Well, they will probably soon be ILLEGAL.
After all, who knows how the federal fascists will choose to define
"personal information" (phone numbers? office addresses?) or
"harassment" and "intimidation"?

In reality, part of the purpose of the First Amendment--the part
about "redress of grievances"--was to say that the people have the
RIGHT to "harass" and "intimidate" those in government. What could
be more basic to the right to petition for redress than being
allowed to say "We think what you're doing is BAD, and we want you
to STOP IT!"? In the Supreme Court case of Near v. Minnesota (283
U.S. 697 (1931)), this was stated rather bluntly.

"The importance of [freedom of the press] consists... in its
diffusion of liberal sentiments on the administration of
Government, its ready communication of thoughts between subjects,
and its consequential promotion of union among them whereby
oppressive officers are SHAMED OR INTIMIDATED into more honourable
and just modes of conducting affairs."

In other words, we're SUPPOSED to be able to pester, nag and harass
our "public servants" into doing the right thing. Well, if Fuhrer
Conyer's law passes, you can say goodbye to that.

Since I was falsely convicted and imprisoned, the feds have upped
the penalty to $5,000 for filing a claim for refund based on
anything the IRS unilaterally declares to be "frivolous." If you
ask the Tax Court or District Court to hear your case, you can be
fined even more. In addition, thanks to the efforts of fascists
like J.J. McNaab, you can now be fined that much for REQUESTING a
"Collections Due Process" hearing. And soon, maybe you'll get
imprisoned for telling people to write to federal cops and judges,
asking them to answer questions about the law. After all, isn't
that "harassment"? You can bet that the federal cowards will view
it that way.

When people no longer dare to openly criticize their own
government, which is already true in a lot of cases here in the
U.S., you're on a one-way express route to totalitarianism. That's
why it was the FIRST Amendment. But the feds can already, without
fear of reprisal, shut down web sites, silence individuals, steal
perfectly legal videos, and otherwise demonize, slander, harass,
rob and imprison those who speak out against government wrongdoing.
(I speak from personal experience.)

So how long are we going to keep pretending this is a "free
country"? Oh, I forgot: you better not say that it ISN'T a free
country. Some elitist megalomaniac like John Conyers might call
that an attempt to harass or intimidate him and his fellow tyrants.
So smile, and sing along with me... "If you're free and you know
it, clank your chains! If you're free and you know
it, clank your chains! ..."


Larken Rose