See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: House Passes ‘Terrorism’ Act Against Animal Activists
Source:
http://newstandardnews.net
URL Source: http://newstandardnews.net/content/ ... .cfm/items/3887/printmode/true
Published: Nov 15, 2006
Author: M Tady
Post Date: 2006-11-17 17:43:02 by Kamala
Keywords: None
Views: 422
Comments: 41
House Passes ‘Terrorism’ Act Against Animal Activists by Megan Tady Nov. 15 – Monday afternoon, the US House of Representatives passed a bill that reclassifies unlawful animal-rights tactics as terrorism under certain conditions, even if they are non-violent. As reported by The NewStandard just hours before the House took its voice vote on the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), the bill will classify civil disobedience actions – such as blockades, property destruction, trespassing, and the freeing of captive animals – as terrorism. The AETA amends current law enabling the government to prosecute activists for intentionally damaging property used by "animal enterprises" – businesses that use or sell animals. The AETA expands those provisions to enhance penalties against activists who "interfere" with animal enterprises by destroying property or engaging in behavior that appears "threatening." It even includes perceive threats to companies that work with animal enterprises and takes into account resulting profit losses. The House passed the Senate's version of the bill, which was approved in September. Critics consider that version bad enough, but they had been especially alarmed that a House version of the bill swept in "non-violent physical obstruction of an animal enterprise" as an offense if it causes a loss of profits. While the Senate version does not explicitly ban such activity, critics believe it to be vague enough to encompass civil disobedience in its scope. The AETA does make specific provisions to safeguard activity protected under the First Amendment, but critics have raised concerns it could have the effect of discouraging even lawful protests. Because only a voice vote was taken, there is no record of who approved or opposed the AETA bill. Representative Dennis Kucinich (D–Ohio) spoke against the legislation, saying it compromises civil rights and threatens to "chill" free speech. Kucinich also addressed the animals he fears will be less protected if the legislation scares off protesters. "Just as we need to protect people's right to conduct their work without fear of assault, so too this Congress has yet to address some fundamental ethical principles with respect to animals. How should animals be treated humanely? This is a debate that hasn't come here." © 2006 The NewStandard. All rights reserved. The NewStandard is a non-profit publisher that encourages noncommercial reproduction of its content. Reprints must prominently attribute the author and The NewStandard, hyperlink to http://newstandardnews.net (online) or display http://newstandardnews.net (print), and carry this notice. For more information or commercial reprint rights, please see the TNS reprint policy.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-1) not displayed.
.
.
.
#2. To: Kamala (#0)
Why can't we use RICO to go after these animal rights asswipes? Animals have no rights. Eat them all!!
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Reclassifying these types of crimes as terrorism is beyond the pale as far as intrusion of the federal jurisdiction into what were always, and should remain, state prosecuted crimes. The sooner we get sheriffs elected in our counties who will cut the feds off at the knees and kick them out for good, the sooner we will see things be put right.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
Humans are animals too. You speak the tongue of fascism well, have you been practicing it for a while? You make your existence an anthem to put the people you live around down, what else do you do to them to satisfy your sociopathic tendencies?
Got wire cutters? cut fence around any cattle ranch. The profit margins can't take the losses this causes. This law is fuel to the fire. All other activists are next. Any and all ways to harm animal based concerns is now on the table as to do agenda items. This law sets a precedent. Anyone who can't see that is a fool.
Jews are just attempting to protect the "ADL" brand that the Animal Defense League has been infringing.
"...it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things or in a private house to murder a child; it should not be permitted any sect then to sacrifice children." -Thomas Jefferson
I agree. Animals eat each other - I have yet to see a lion respect the rights of a gazelle or a cow respect the rights of grass. You speak the tongue of fascism well, have you been practicing it for a while? Hitler was a vegetarian and animal rights advocate - I am neither. Penn and Teller Video on PeTA: This is a must- see . . . it's a Penn and Teller video clip, so the language is pretty salty. It speaks for itself.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I advocate shooting to death on sight anyone who does this to someones private property.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
You think a fence is worth more then a human life? Actually, you would be the one committing the capital crime, cutting a fence at best is a class C felony or even a misdemeanor most places. Predator/prey relationship is different then vivisection, the fur trade, or some of the cruel animal husbandry practices opposed by PETA. I am an Earth First! activist who has nearly died when a security guard precipitated my fall three stories from a tree I was merely bannering. I know first hand about the dangers of overzealous tactics. I am not impressed by your bravado, in fact, for all I know with your constant expressions of contempt for Americans you were one of the crew who set the charges in the twin towers in NYC. Not likely, but who is to say? Someone did it. I often wonder what sort of personality would fit a well developed profile of those with that blood on their hands for a little bit of money. ;-)
Next thing you'll know they be throwing Ralph Nader in prison because "Corvairs have rights".
When the going gets weird the weird turn pro. - Hunter S Thompson
Zoom-zoom.
are you expecting that? i think it's too late. i think most sheriffs have already been co-opted.
They are like the 501(c)(3) preachers. They have sold out for federal benefits. We are soon to take one of these new sheriffs out here and run him into a civil suit head first. He will not like that he must learn the law, and that it is there for him to obey. That is another one for a friend besides the one I have going now. BTW, it still has not been dismissed and a friend tells me my suit is one of the longest to last. He says they usually get dismissed pretty quick.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
Damn right I do.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Shame on you. And if you come on to my property to do vandalism like say cut my fence to free my cattle I will do all I can to try and kill you.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I still chuckle at the remembrance of the interview I saw 10-15 years ago???? with the cute little gal wanting to extend rights to plants too. She talked of homeowners slaughtering their lawns and wood cutters of murdering trees so others could simply stay warm. It really is just a matter where each person draws that line. My line seems to be near yours though.
The law punishes people who violate the continuum of force. If one is in no eminent danger of harm, one can't make themselves judge jury and executioner. It is precisely this out of context call for deadly force that someone would use to justify blowing up the twin towers and building seven of the NYC World Trade Center. They would -- and did -- rationalize those thousands who died as justifiable in the context of inciting an entire nation to war against the Muslim world. And seeing how you inappropriately loath Muslims, you might even agree that the rational for blowing these occupied buildings up was a necessary thing to do. So, if you didn't help set the charges as I hypothetically posed for argument you are capable of doing, how are you anymore then marginally better then those people who served the economic interests of those who owned the buildings that was going to cost so much to upgrade and had so much insurance on it, and the governments of Israel and the U.S. in making war and mayhem more palatable to the peoples of these two countries? It is precisely this mindset that makes people go to the point where they do property damage like fence cutting; the knowledge that if they do non-violent dissent, they are dealing with people who would operate in the modus that their lives did not matter. Kill a fence cutter, five more people will burn down your buildings, shoot them, even more will shoot you. That is my point, that escalating the violence only promotes more violence; it does nothing to end it.
Please check with all your local laws before you kill someone of violating your property - in some sovereign states that is still allowed. Of course killing is a last resort and should only be an option if they are resisting a citizen's arrest.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Come now, non-violent dissent in the public square is guaranteed in the bill of rights (freedom of assembly and freedom of speech) as well as organized violence (right to bear arms as part of a well organized citizens militia). On my property though I am sovereign per English Common law.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Someone outside your home and castle with a pair of wire cutters in their hands are not subject to die anywhere merely for cutting wire. Whomever kills someone for assuming they were damaging property with no warning is a murderer. Say hypothetically they were a hiker and saw a broken fence and had a leatherman, and were being a Samaritan and splicing the fence. You kill them and find out it was an oopsie. But oh well, according to Destro, assume the worst, and without warning kill them. Don't you see how stupid you sound?
Owning land does not give you sovereignty superseding local, state or federal law. In fact, in American now with the new eminent domain standard as handed down by the SCOTUS, your land can be condemned and bought if another entity can demonstrate that they will benefit the community with more jobs or tax revenue. And as far as the right to shoot someone in your home if you perceive and eminent danger to you or yours' that is not a standard in even half of the fifty states.
Say you own property, and you want to cut trees down. A well known non-violent protester takes up residence in one of them protecting it, you actually think you can just shoot someone for protesting? Especially someone well known for being non-violent? You would go to prison, or be executed for committing a Capital crime. You just can't shoot or kill people like vermin because they annoy you, even on your property.
As reported by The NewStandard just hours before the House took its voice vote on the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), the bill will classify civil disobedience actions – such as blockades, property destruction, trespassing, and the freeing of captive animals – as terrorism. The AETA amends current law enabling the government to prosecute activists for intentionally damaging property used by "animal enterprises" – businesses that use or sell animals. The AETA expands those provisions to enhance penalties against activists who "interfere" with animal enterprises by destroying property or engaging in behavior that appears "threatening." It even includes perceive threats to companies that work with animal enterprises and takes into account resulting profit losses. The House passed the Senate's version of the bill, which was approved in September. Critics consider that version bad enough, but they had been especially alarmed that a House version of the bill swept in "non-violent physical obstruction of an animal enterprise" as an offense if it causes a loss of profits. While the Senate version does not explicitly ban such activity, critics believe it to be vague enough to encompass civil disobedience in its scope. Well, I guess since the Talmud classifies all us non-Jews as beasts/animals, and since the Federal Reserve uses all of us 'beasts' and sells our birth cerificates on the international auction block, I guess this will add oomph to that clause in the fraudulent 14th Amendment that says thou shalt not question [nor protest, nor petition against, nor picket against? the animal enterprise known as the Federal Reserve or the US Government, perpetrators of] the "national" debt, as that might interfere with the money-changers' profits.
Why should we accept this violation? Tsk-Tsk.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
If I saw him sneaking on my property I would call the police and go out with a shot gun to make a citizen's arrest. I hope you don't have any gear that I can claim was used as a weapon against me.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
So clarify this comment please; are you saying one should act in dissent and refuse to comply if forced to sell, or one should fight an eminent domain seizure in court?
I would say that if you lived in an area with a long police response and there was a history of people stealing or damaging your property, this would be appropriate. However, if they turned and immediately moved to leave your property, it would be best to let them go and let the police deal with it. Someone with a pair of wire cutters who is trespassing is not worth precipitating a major personal confrontation with. A hypothetical for you; you are in the World Trade Center before 9-11, you see someone installing wire with markings you know from experience denotes fuse or det cord. You try to take them into custody physically as they have dangerous explosive material in a building of a complex so big it has it's own zip code. A security officer working for the management of the building who are agents for the owner shoots and kills you for interfering with activity that is illegal, but sanctioned by the owner. Who is right? The owner who is doing to his property that he wishes to, or the good Samaritan trying to do a citizen's arrest of someone installing demolition gear to bring down the building?
You try to take them into custody physically as they have dangerous explosive material in a building of a complex so big it has it's own zip code. A security officer working for the management of the building who are agents for the owner shoots and kills you for interfering with activity that is illegal, but sanctioned by the owner. Who is right? The owner who is doing to his property that he wishes to, or the good Samaritan trying to do a citizen's arrest of someone installing demolition gear to bring down the building? I doubt Destro could answer this. But I will take a shot at it. The owner is in the wrong since what he has sanctioned puts society and the public at risk. Therefore, the security guard would be guilty of murder while acting as agent of the owner. And by extension, so would the owner be gulity of murder.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
You answered as I would, but Destro's silence worries me. How about it Detro, have an opinion? Surely you who is so much more intelligent and educated then most 'dumb, uneducated' Americans has an opinion on this hypothetical. Or has your brain turned into a wet steel noodle?
'dumb, uneducated' Americans Nothing to be alarmed over. Destro is merely trying to rationalize how to best obfuscate the destruction of the towers as an inside job. I'll bet he would like to know if I am living in a trailer in the woods out here. :p
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
Nothing to be alarmed over. Destro is merely trying to rationalize how to best obfuscate the destruction of the towers as an inside job. No, it was Saturday and I was out. Get a life guys. You can use force to restrain. If the bugger who broke into your domicile while you try and restrain him dies then 12 peers can set you free if the prosecutor goes down that road.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Is that not the preferred American domicile?
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Where do you get such ideas, do you really believe that, but mostly why does it even mattter?
If you think about it, trying to insult someone by saying they probably live in a trailer is just stupid, and shows ignorance and lack of depth in analyzing situations or understanding people.
Did he really say that? ROTFLMAO! I've got him on the filter so I do not have to deal with that nonsense. ;0)
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
Wrong, BOZO, one juror can set you free. It is called a hung jury, as when one of your peers is not convinced of guilt, or jury nullification. Jury nullification is a means of a final check and balance the people hold to override abuse of law making authority at the legislative and executive levels. This is all the more important in these times of judicial tyranny where it is imperative that people know and hold high morals and religious values.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
You are talking about domicile, I am speaking of someone outside on your land posing no eminent danger to you moving to leave. You cannot kill someone you suspect of a minor crime like fence cutting if they are leaving, you don't need to become a cop, judge, jury and executioner.
Why are you avoiding the hypothetical scenario pertaining to the World Trade Center? Cat got your tongue? You are stalling and shifting the discussion to make it appear you are answering when you in fact are avoiding uncomfortable aspects of what we talk about here.
It's beginning to look more and more attractive to me. Simple, easy to maintain, cheap, low taxes... Yup, I can see one in my future. hehehe
Your Honor the fence cutter came at me with the fence cutting tool and I defended myself. I doubt you would get a trial much less a conviction of such a thing in cattle country. Case dismissed.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
depreciation costs...
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
#3. To: IndieTX (#1)
#4. To: Destro (#2)
#5. To: IndieTX (#1)
#6. To: Kamala (#0)
#7. To: Ferret Mike (#4)
Humans are animals too.
#8. To: Ferret Mike, IndieTX (#5)
Got wire cutters? cut fence around any cattle ranch.
#9. To: Destro (#8)
#10. To: Ferret Mike (#9)
#11. To: Dakmar (#10)
#12. To: BTP Holdings (#3)
The sooner we get sheriffs elected in our counties who will cut the feds off at the knees and kick them out for good, the sooner we will see things be put right.
#13. To: christine (#12)
(Edited)
i think most sheriffs have already been co-opted.
#14. To: Ferret Mike (#9)
You think a fence is worth more then a human life?
#15. To: Ferret Mike (#9)
I am not impressed by your bravado, in fact, for all I know with your constant expressions of contempt for Americans you were one of the crew who set the charges in the twin towers in NYC.
#16. To: Destro (#15)
#17. To: Destro (#14)
"Damn right I do."
#18. To: Ferret Mike (#17)
The law punishes people who violate the continuum of force. If one is in no eminent danger of harm, one can't make themselves judge jury and executioner.
#19. To: Ferret Mike (#17)
that if they do non-violent dissent
#20. To: Destro (#18)
#21. To: Destro (#19)
"Come now, non-violent dissent in the public square is guaranteed in the bill of rights (freedom of assembly and freedom of speech) as well as organized violence (right to bear arms as part of a well organized citizens militia). On my property though I am sovereign per English Common law."
#22. To: Destro (#19)
#23. To: Kamala (#0)
Monday afternoon, the US House of Representatives passed a bill that reclassifies unlawful animal-rights tactics as terrorism under certain conditions, even if they are non-violent.
#24. To: Ferret Mike (#21)
In fact, in American now with the new eminent domain standard as handed down by the SCOTUS
#25. To: Ferret Mike (#22)
A well known non-violent protester takes up residence in one of them protecting it, you actually think you can just shoot someone for protesting?
#26. To: Destro (#24)
"Why should we accept this violation? Tsk-Tsk."
#27. To: Destro (#25)
(Edited)
"If I saw him sneaking on my property I would call the police and go out with a shot gun to make a citizen's arrest."
#28. To: Ferret Mike (#27)
A hypothetical for you; you are in the World Trade Center before 9-11, you see someone installing wire with markings you know from experience denotes fuse or det cord.
#29. To: BTP Holdings, Destro (#28)
#30. To: Ferret Mike (#29)
Destro's silence worries me.
#31. To: BTP Holdings, Ferret Mike (#30)
(Edited)
Destro's silence worries me.
#32. To: BTP Holdings (#30)
I'll bet he would like to know if I am living in a trailer in the woods out here. :p
#33. To: Destro (#32)
Is that not the preferred American domicile?
#34. To: Destro, BTP Holdings (#32)
#35. To: Diana (#34)
If you think about it, trying to insult someone by saying they probably live in a trailer is just stupid, and shows ignorance and lack of depth in analyzing situations or understanding people.
#36. To: Destro, Ferret Mike (#30)
then 12 peers can set you free if the prosecutor goes down that road.
#37. To: Destro (#31)
"You can use force to restrain. If the bugger who broke into your domicile while you try and restrain him dies then 12 peers can set you free if the prosecutor goes down that road."
#38. To: Destro (#32)
#39. To: Destro (#32)
Is that not the preferred American domicile?
The SS and other Gestapo like US Government agents spying on this site should go suck a horse's ass!
#40. To: Ferret Mike (#37)
You are talking about domicile, I am speaking of someone outside on your land posing no eminent danger to you moving to leave.
#41. To: Critter (#39)
It's beginning to look more and more attractive to me. Simple, easy to maintain, cheap, low taxes...
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest