Friday, April 5, 2013

When Did Peaceful Protests Become 'Anti-Government Rallies'?

Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. --First Amendment in the Bill of Rights.

Dees Illustration
Eric Blair
Activist Post

I love my children more than anything in the world, as I'm sure all of the parents reading this can relate.  It's a strange way to start a post about free speech and word manipulation, but I assure you it's relevant.

The recent story of a couple kidnapping their own children from a court-appointed custodian after having their parental rights stripped has jarred me to the core. This could easily be me, or you.

What did the parents do that was so awful that they lost permanent parental rights of their boys?

ABC reports:
According to earlier information, the couple lost custody of the two boys after attending an anti-government rally in Louisiana. The father was charged with possession of drugs (pot) in the presence of the children. (my emphasis and additions). 
VIDEO BELOW:
What really shocked me in this story was the use of "anti-government rally" in place of peaceful protest.  Aren't all protests for redress of grievances "anti-government"?
I realized that this was done very deliberately, and not the first time I've seen this subtle tactic used to bastardize the First Amendment right to free speech. In fact, it is now frequently used in place of "demonstrations" or "protests" in news headlines everywhere.  Google "anti-government rally" and have fun scrolling. It seems that when the establishment dislikes the message of a given demonstration they call it an "anti-government rally" ever-so-slightly invoking thoughts of Klan rallies and all the emotional triggers that come with it. Just like how all pro-Second Amendment demonstrations are referred to as "gun rallies". Compare this rhetoric of the Arab Spring or Uprising, or Occupy Wall Street demonstrations. Anti-government rally was NEVER used by the establishment to describe those protests. So when it is used, its negative connotation is clearly being used for a purpose. But for what? To change the definition of peaceful protesters to something more insidious? Or to soil free speech altogether? Or both? The right to peaceably assemble has already become criminalized.  People protesting too close to public buildings in America are now felons thanks to the passage of HR 347, the "Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011," or "Trespass Act." It seems that was the beginning of demonizing protests as anti-government. In a free society there is nothing wrong with protesting the government's actions, or even in the term anti-government. Yet, since the war-on-terror-industrial complex seems to have run out of Islamic villains to demonize, detain indefinitely, torture, or drone bomb, a new enemy had to be invented to keep the money flowing and civil liberties suppressed. The US Justice Department and Homeland Security have been cleverly, deliberately, and methodically swapping in the "anti-government" label for terrorist. Without ever really defining what anti-government means, they both officially state that "anti-government" Americans are now the biggest threat in the war on terror. A Fusion Center in Arkansas, which coordinates anti-terror activity between the DHS and local law enforcement, recently announced that they don't spy on all Americans without a warrant, just the ones on the anti-government list. How comforting, since the label is conveniently broad enough that potentially anyone who complains about the government, a policy, or a politician could be on the anti-government watch list. This is nearly anyone who's even remotely paying attention by the way. And it seems these poor parents in the story above made it to this dreaded list. Now they have been pushed to extreme measures by a ridiculously intrusive government that would have your kids, too, if they caught you with weed at an anti-prohibition rally. I don't know about you, but I'm not sure I would have the willpower not to tie up the custodian and kidnap my own children if I was an actor in this made-for-TV movie. I'm radically opposed to the policy that led to these children being stripped from their parents, which must make me anti-government.  I'm disgusted that marijuana, a perfectly safe and helpful plant, remains illegal while alcohol freely flows. Strike two for being anti-government. And I despise that my own government spies on me, suppresses my free speech rights, and lumps me in with violent extremists. Strike three. Add me to your list. I'll see you at the next rally. Read other articles by Eric Blair Here
 



BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

When?

The year was 2003. America was angry and the retarded child of a CIA killer was our President.
That President feared the people, so he created free speach zones that were strongly supported by the idiots who voted him into office.
Phil Ashcroft defended the W Bush decree to end peaceful protest in America saying about the protesters:

"To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty … your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and … give ammunition to America’s enemies.”

Anonymous said...

When Bush travels around the United States, the Secret Service visits the location ahead of time and orders local police to set up “free speech zones” or “protest zones” where people opposed to Bush policies (and sometimes sign-carrying supporters) are quarantined. These zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters out of presidential sight and outside the view of media covering the event.

When Bush came to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, “The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us.” The local police, at the Secret Service’s behest, set up a “designated free-speech zone” on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush’s speech. The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, though folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president’s path. Neel refused to go to the designated area and was arrested for disorderly conduct; the police also confiscated his sign. Neel later commented, “As far as I’m concerned, the whole country is a free speech zone. If the Bush administration has its way, anyone who criticizes them will be out of sight and out of mind.”

Neel later commented, “As far as I’m concerned, the whole country is a free speech zone. If the Bush administration has its way, anyone who criticizes them will be out of sight and out of mind.”


Obama seems very happy with the Bush created free speech zones. Democrats are scummy hypocrites for continuing this policy.

Anonymous said...

I live in the county this took place in in Florida. North Korea might be about to explode an EMP over us and put us back into the middle ages, killing 9/10 of us within a year, not to mention 50 other potential horrors I could mention, yet this is the only story on our news, over and over and over, all day long. it makes me sick that these presstitutes act like what they are doing is normal. The stupid public laps it up. I throw my hands up, wondering how people so totally asleep can ever be awakened.

Anonymous said...

of Course this " dangerous " label is nonsensical HYPE to generate attention, when they obviously love their kids enough to risk their own lives and it's similar to what's being done in UK Totalitarian State , stepping on Parents Rights ; taking kids ; putting cameras in homes .
If I see the Parents , I'll say good luck and that's it .

Anonymous said...

"Anti-government' would mean anything that disagrees with anything that is current policy of the government. This is the spin you get when a PRO-GOVERNMENT company tells its story of the news.

Jim McMexico said...

It happened when the 14th Amendment was put in place without actually being ratified. That Amendment established a second class of citizens, called Federal citizens in contrast to state citizens, making those Federal citizens bond servants (read slaves) of the Federal Government without Constitutional rights. So the blacks have never been free, and others were enslaved by that Amendment. That Amendment also promoted the generation of public debt by the Federal Government without any recourse being available to the people. Get informed, We the people have been af'd ever since. That needs to change. Iceland set the example for change.

Anonymous said...

The drum beats are louder and there are more drums every day. Five hollow points per well-armed anti-government American might not be enough.

biggly.wiggly said...

Maybe just maybe, people will began to see that there is no hope for this system. Stop passively supporting a system that has grown out of control by protesting anything. I bet the same people doing the protesting will be the same people starving because they expect the goverment to save them.

Anonymous said...

I lost all 3 of MY children to the state of Colorado back in 1980. I lived in So Dak at the time and contracted Hepatitis A. (contagious hep)...Not passed by drugs or needles or anything of that sort.

I contacted their father, who had moved to Colorado, and asked him to take care of the kids while I recovered.

A couple of weeks later, my youngest, who was less than a year old, got into some liquid plumber and it spilled on his leg. My ex took him to the ER but left before being seen, like an idiot, and the child protective services were notified.

He then ended up turning them ALL over to the state and told them that he didn't know where I was, and that I had simply abandoned the kids with him.

I didn't have any way of knowing what had happened, but when I was feeling a little better I tried to call and check on the kids and ask him to bring them back, but couldn't get in touch with him....his phone would ring and ring.

Eventually I was notified by CPS in South Dakota and was told that they had a dependency and neglect petition filed against me... I fought it for 1.5 yrs. but my age (22) and inexperience in dealing with anything like this worked in their favor and they took the opportunity to steal my kids. I didn't have any family to turn to for support, or anyone else for that matter.

They then had a relinquishment/termination hearing and said I was "unfit", yes I admit I was irresponsible and made a lot of mistakes, but "un-fit?"....NO!

They took my kids and split them up into foster homes for 2 yrs. (the foster that had my daughters allowed me to visit them) Then they were all three adopted to a couple in Littleton, Co; where they lived for the next 8 yrs.!!!! (I didn't know where they went after they were adopted)

I was told I could write letters to my kids and they would be kept in something called a "life book" and they would be available to the kids when they turned 16. I wrote to them several times a week, sent pictures and always made sure to add my phone number, and then sent them to the Dept Of Child Services.

Eight years later, I was remarried and lived in Salt Lake City, the couple who adopted my kids called me and asked if I wanted my kids back! It was right before Christmas in 1988. They were having a LOT of trouble with the kids and had put them thru a LOT of crazy counseling and behavioral programs over the years. I seriously thought it was some sort of sick prank. They offered pay for all costs for my second husband and I to adopt them back from them. Bizarre huh? It's all TRUE!
Christmas Day of '88 we drove to Denver and "met" my kids all over again, and brought them home with us.

The following Sept. (1989) we went back to Denver for the adoption proceedings. The judge kept shaking his head, and asked me several different times, "So you're their biological mother?"

There's no way to make up for all that time that was stolen from me and from my kids.. Our relationship was permanently scarred, and couldn't be fixed. It still isn't a good relationship and it's now 2013.

My husband died 6 days before Christmas in 1997, just before my youngest graduated from high school.. By then they had all moved out and started their own lives, so there really wasn't any reason for me to stay in Utah. Two years later I finally sold my home and moved to North Florida.

I hear from them once in a while, but not often. I've flown back out to West to visit them in the past but always felt like an unwelcome house guest, so I stopped going.

I never would have believed that my kids could have been LEGALLY stolen from me, but they were.. unfortunately, the government DOES this to other young women, in the "best interest" of the child(ren)...but is it, REALLY?


Hide Behind said...

Power Centers, state.federal, educational centers are not places where policy can be affected.
The further away from they who "need" the present central massive controls and the collective interactions of that mass. Is where we need to begin organizing.
They cannot survive outside that compact grouping and what
we have to do is make that grouping even tighter and tighter every way and chance we get.
DRIVE EVERY OUTREACH OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT BACK INTO ITS DC AND BELTWAY ORIGINS INCLUDING ALL EDUCATIONAL WELFARE AND MILITARY ENTITY
The same goes for the state centers of government ad well.
For 1 thing and for once and for all the FN notion that 1 program fits all people no FN matter whete in states they exist is false.
STATES NEED TO WEEN THEMSELVES FROM EVERY AND I do mean every Federal officer and official within their states. Send them to their nannys and ninnys.
You want freedom then they can have their brand in the least productive centers of U S society. The 13 original colonies have turned into royal provinces for the priveleged who suck the lifeblood out of this nation.
THE SIC"EDUCATE" THEIR CHILDREN AND THEN SEND THEM FORTH NOT TO GOVERN BUT RULE THEIR TERRITORIES AND THEY DO NOT WANT ANYONE TO OPPPOSE THEIR RIGHTS TO DO SO.
will be a rough show for a few years but once stated start looking afteer their own resources to be used to help their state residents first and for most. Then yes we can starve the Beltway and let them finish eating each oythrr.
VISA'S FOR NON NATIVE STATE citizens why the hell not.
WHY should locals be reduced to only second chance at work health or educational opportunitys for those people driven or sponsored by out of staate residencys.

wishbone said...

protests became "ANTI-GOVERNMENT-RALLIES" just after the US government and their buddies in "MOSSAD" carried out the murder of more than 3000 American people on 9/11, giving them an excuse to install a Nazi police state, now that same government (theres no difference between republicans and democrats anymore, just the puppet at the top) is in the process of ramping up the FEAR again by provoking north korea, which they will use to enforce more Nazi crap in the USA. America, you have a problem.!!!!

Anonymous said...

As others elsewhere have often suggested, we must stop parroting their language. Obviously, the protests are not anti-government, they are championing anti-government corruption, pro-transparency, pro-constitution, thus, real representative government.

We absolutely must get the neurolinguistics programming reversed on the term "anti-government" so that each and every time that word is uttered, it is psychologically paired with anti-government corruption and pro-representative government - all backed by natural born rights.

I've sparred with professional NWO propagandists before and I know we can turn their psyop wording into a massive backfire.

Anonymous said...

Here's the problem...

"And I despise that my own government spies on me, suppresses my free speech rights, and lumps me in with violent extremists."

IT'S NO LONGER YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT. Did we get what we elected?

Anonymous said...

God this is heartbreaking, the bias in reporting is unbelievable. It is designed to put fear into people. how brainwashed can people be?

Anonymous said...

Talking on the internet about it will it change anything. Soooooo......

Post a Comment