U.S. To Outlaw Free Speech

>>160143
Hopefully they'll outlaw communism as well.

>>160143
The proposed measure, called the Israel Anti-Boycott Act (S. 720), was introduced by Cardin on March 23. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that the bill “was drafted with the assistance of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC].” Indeed, AIPAC, in its 2017 Lobbying Agenda, identified passage of this bill as one of its top lobbying priorities for the year:

The bill’s co-sponsors include the senior Democrat in Washington, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, his New York colleague Kirsten Gillibrand, and several of the Senate’s more liberal members, such as Ron Wyden of Oregon, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Maria Cantwell of Washington. Illustrating the bipartisanship that AIPAC typically summons, it also includes several of the most right-wing Senators such as Ted Cruz of Texas, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Marco Rubio of Florida.

A similar measure was introduced in the House on the same date by two Republicans and one Democrat. It already has amassed 234 co-sponsors: 63 Democrats and 174 Republicans. As in the Senate, AIPAC has assembled an impressive ideological diversity among supporters, predictably including many of the most right-wing House members – Jason Chaffetz, Liz Cheney, Peter King – along with the second-ranking Democrat in the House, Steny Hoyer.

Among the co-sponsors of the bill are several of the politicians who have become political celebrities by positioning themselves as media leaders of the anti-Trump #Resistance, including three California House members who have become heroes to Democrats and staples of the cable news circuit: Ted Lieu, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell. These politicians, who have built a wide public following by posturing as opponents of authoritarianism, are sponsoring one of the most oppressive and authoritarian bills that has pended before Congress in quite some time.

cont.

>>160145
LAST NIGHT, the ACLU posted a letter it sent to all members of the Senate urging them to oppose this bill. Warning that “proponents of the bill are seeking additional co-sponsors,” the civil liberties group explained that “it would punish individuals for no reason other than their political beliefs.” The letter detailed what makes this bill so particularly threatening to basic civic freedoms:

It is no small thing for the ACLU to insert itself into this controversy. One of the most traumatic events in the organization’s history was when it lost large numbers of donors and supporters in the late 1970s after they defended the free speech rights of neo-Nazis to march through Skokie, Illinois, a town with a large community of Holocaust survivors.

Even the bravest of organizations often steadfastly avoid any controversies relating to Israel. Yet here, while appropriately pointing out that the ACLU “takes no position for or against the effort to boycott Israel or any foreign country,” they categorically denounce this AIPAC-sponsored proposal for what it is: a bill that “seeks only to punish the exercise of constitutional rights.”

The ACLU has similarly opposed bipartisan efforts at the state level to punish businesses who participate in the boycott, pointing out that “boycotts to achieve political goals are a form of expression that the Supreme Court has ruled are protected by the First Amendment’s protections of freedom of speech, assembly, and petition,” and that such bills “place unconstitutional conditions on the exercise of constitutional rights.” The bill now co-sponsored in the Congress by more than half of the House and close to half of the Senate is far more extreme than those.

cont.

>>160147
THUS FAR, not a single member of Congress has joined the ACLU in denouncing this bill. The Intercept this morning sent inquiries to numerous non-committed members of the Senate and House who have yet to speak on this bill. We also sent inquiries to several co-sponsors of the bill – such as Congressman Lieu – who have positioned themselves as civil liberties champions and opponents of authoritarianism, asking:

Congressman Lieu: Last night, the ACLU vehemently denounced a bill that you are cosponsoring – to criminalize support for a boycott of Israel – as a grave attack on free speech. Do you have any comment on the ACLU’s denunciation? You’ve been an outspoken champion for civil liberties; how can you reconcile that record with an effort to make it a felony for Americans to engage in activism that protests a foreign government’s actions? We’re writing about this today; any statement would be appreciated.

This morning, Lieu responded: “Thank you for sharing the letter. The bill has been around since March and this is the first time I have seen this issue raised. We will look into it” (the Intercept will post any response from Rep. Lieu, or any late responses from others, as soon as they are received).

Senator Cantwell told The Intercept she is “a strong supporter of free speech rights” and will be reviewing the bill for First Amendment concerns in light of the ACLU statement.

Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, when asked by the Intercept about the ACLU’s warning that the bill he is co-sponsoring criminalizes free speech, affirmed his support for the bill by responding: “I continue to support a strong U.S./Israel relationship.”

cont.

>>160148
Meanwhile, some co-sponsors seemed not to have any idea what they co-sponsored – almost as though they reflexively sign whatever comes from AIPAC without having any idea what’s in it. Democratic Senator Gary Peters of Michigan, for instance, seemed genuinely bewildered when told of the ACLU’s letter, saying “what’s the Act? You’ll have to get back to me on that.”

A similar exchange took place with another co-sponsor, one of AIPAC’s most reliable allies, Democratic Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey, who said: “I’d want to read it . . . . I’d really have to look at it.”

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., a cosponsor, said she hadn’t seen the ACLU letter but would give it a look. “I certainly will take their position into consideration, just like I take everybody’s position into consideration,” she said.

Gillibrand, the only senator in the 2020 presidential mix to cosponsor the bill, told The Intercept she would have a statement to provide, which we’ll add as soon as it’s provided.

Perhaps most stunning is our interview with the primary sponsor of the bill, Democratic Senator Benjamin Cardin, who seemed to have no idea what was in his bill, particularly insisting that it contains no criminal penalties.

But as the ACLU put it, “violations would be subject to a minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty o f $ 1 million and 20 years in prison.”

cont.

>>160150
That’s because, as Josh Ruebner expertly detailed when the bill was first unveiled, “the bill seeks to amend two laws – the Export Administration Act of 1979 and the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945,” and “the potential penalties for violating this bill are steep: a minimum $250,000 civil penalty and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years imprisonment, as stipulated in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.”

Indeed, to see how serious the penalties are, and how clear it is that those penalties are imposed by this bill, one can just compare the bill’s text in Section 8(a), which provides that violators will be punished “in accordance with section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705),” to the penalty provisions of that law, which state:

The bill also extends the current prohibition on participating in boycotts sponsored by foreign governments to cover boycotts from international organizations such as the U.N and the European Union. It also explicitly extends the boycott ban from Israel generally to any parts of Israel, including the settlements. For that reason, Ruebner explains, the bill – by design – would outlaw “campaigns by the Palestine solidarity movement to pressure corporations to cut ties to Israel or even with Israeli settlements.”

cont.

>>160151
THIS PERNICIOUS BILL highlights many vital yet typically ignored dynamics in Washington. First, journalists love to lament the lack of bipartisanship in Washington, yet the very mention of the word “Israel” causes most members of both parties to quickly snap into line in a show of unanimity that would make the regime of North Korea blush with envy. Even when virtually the entire world condemns Israeli aggression, or declares settlements illegal, the U.S. Congress – across party and ideological lines – finds virtually complete harmony in uniting against the world consensus and in defense of the Israeli government.

Amid measured support for the U.S. cruise missile attack on a Syrian air base, some vocal Republicans and Democrats are reprimanding the White House for launching the strike without first getting congressional approval.(AP Photo/Susan Walsh) Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md. Photo: Susan Walsh/APSecond, the free speech debate in the U.S. is incredibly selective and warped. Pundits and political officials love to crusade as free speech champions – when doing so involves defending mainstream ideas or attacking marginalized, powerless groups such as minority college students. But when it comes to one of the most systemic, powerful, and dangerous assaults on free speech in the U.S. and the west generally – the growing attempt to literally criminalize speech and activism aimed at the Israeli Government’s occupation – these free speech warriors typically fall silent.

cont.

>>160152
Third, AIPAC continues to be one of the most powerful, and pernicious, lobbying forces in the country. In what conceivable sense is it of benefit of Americans to turn them into felons for the crime of engaging in political activism in protest of a foreign nation’s government? And this is hardly the first time they have attempted to do this through their most devoted Congressional loyalists; Cardin, for instance, had previously succeeded in inserting into trade bills provisions that would disfavor anyone who supports a boycott of Israel.

Finally, it is hard to put into words the irony of watching many of the most celebrated and beloved Congressional leaders of the anti-authoritarian Resistance – Gillibrand, Schiff, Swalwell and Lieu – sponsor one of the most oppressive and authoritarian bills to appear in Congress in many years. How can one credibly inveigh against “authoritarianism” while sponsoring a bill that dictates to American citizens what political views they are and are not allowed to espouse under threat of criminal prosecution? Whatever labels one might want to apply to the sponsors of this bill, “anti-authoritarianism” should be not be among them.

FIN

>>160143
>Communist source
Fake news.

>>160161
> ACLU
> communists

You’re aware that the ACLU went to the Supreme Court to insure that literal Nazis could hold a rally in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie

>>160162
How does the ACLU count to ten?
1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

I don't know how these politicians keep getting away with "not reading" the legislature they sponsor. They have one job and if they can't even do that right then they need to go.

>>160216
>I don't know how these politicians keep getting away with "not reading" the legislature they sponsor.

They don't need to read it when they get their marching orders from AIPAC...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee

>>160267
They don't write them, they don't read them; their only job is to pass them.

>>160180
This seems really clever, but I don't get it. Please help.

There's a really good quote attributed to Voltaire, iirc. It may be relevant.

Something about people you can't criticize, something something.

Fucking dirty rotten kikes.

>>160284
They act like the second amendment doesn't exist.

>>160145

>rubio
>right-wing

This dirty spic wanted blanket amnesty to the millions of dirty spics in this country.

Also, fuck kikes. Fuck mudslime. Fuck niggers. Fuck gooks. Fuck spics. Fuck prarie niggers. The world would be an objectively better place if White Europeans erased everybody else. And you know I'm right.

>>160291
We love freedom, except that one thing... What was it again? Ahh forget it.

Life really is hard, though.
>Guns killing muh minorities
>Guns are best defense against guns
>Let's make it so no one has them though
>WAIT, THE BAD GUYS ARENT FOLLOWING THE LAW
>well shit

>>160291

Sure, the ACLU is hypocritically on the wrong side when it comes to the 2nd Amendment but they’re not fighting _against_ it and I figure the NRA does a better job on that gun rights anyways.

..... my god

>>160552

What's truly amazing, is that nobody is talking about it, not the media of course, but also barely anybody on the Internet.

WTF?

>>160591
>https://theintercept.com/2017/07/19/u-s-lawmakers-seek-to-criminally-outlaw-support-for-boycott-campaign-against-israel/

It's not as bad as you suggest. Also, semi-related, the bill being introduced isn't bad until it's in range of being passed. These kinds of bills are "introduced" all the time without getting anywhere.

Response from the senators who co-sponsored the bill:
www.cardin.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cardin-Portman%20response%20to%20ACLU%20Israel%20Anti-Boycott%20Act%207-20-17.pdf

Basically they're extending an existing ban on participating in boycotts organized by foreign countries to those organized by international NGOs, namely the UN and EU, who often boycott Israel. The penalties are based on those from the WW2-era law that this extends, but this does not actually apply to individuals apparently, but rather to companies who administratively collaborate with the boycotting organization, say by returning sales data that's requested for purposes of the boycott.

Still raises the prospect of a US protest organization that participates in such a boycott being fucked over legally if they participate administratively with the UN/EU, but the courts would strike that down in an instant (which doesn't excuse making a law, though since legislators never repeals a law, it could at least motivate someone to raise a test case.)

>>160685
> It's not as bad as you suggest.

“anyone guilty of violating its prohibitions will face a minimum civil penalty of $250,000, and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years in prison.”

> These kinds of bills are "introduced" all the time without getting anywhere.

“43 Senators – 29 Republicans and 14 Democrats – want to implement a law”
“THUS FAR, not a single member of Congress has joined the ACLU in denouncing this bill.”

The media is sweeping this under the rug, two of Trump’s kids are married to Jews and damn near every Congressman is in Israel’s pocket, this is guaranteed to pass.

Our only hope is the Supreme Court recognizing this as the blatant violation of American’s 1st Amendment protections that it is, the same Supreme Court that ruled ObamaCare is a "tax"....

>>160150
>Meanwhile, some co-sponsors seemed not to have any idea what they co-sponsored – almost as though they reflexively sign whatever comes from AIPAC without having any idea what’s in it.

Why read a bill when you can just wait for your party to tell you how to vote on it?

>>160549
That's the joke. NRA does fuck all for fun rights, they're too busy getting import bans for foreign weapons and ammo.

>>160716
Isreal is your biggest defense against shariah dick in your ass

>>160862
Not really, all the bullshit we've had to endure for the past two decades wouldn't have happened if we weren't trying to protect israel.

>>160862
Why do people always say this? When's the last time you saw an Israeli soldier in any country besides Israel?

They don't do shit for our sake you filthy kike.

>>160826
>Boohoo I heard NRA sucks, I'm a right wing voter who easily falls for left wing shilling
Support GOA and fuck off with your nonsense, none of what you say is true.

>>160885
>>160869
Because its what big time conservatives say.
Leading conservatives go on and on about how the Israel is america's greatest ally. There are many GoP rallies where there as many Israli flags as American
Even look at Trump, when he was mentioning cutting forward aid he listed a lot of our major allies, but left out Israel even though they get the most of it.

>>160143
Wow it's like you retards have never heard of the judicial branch. This shot would be stricken down in a heartbeat.

>>160826

who.is.behind.this.post.jpg

>>160862
> Isreal is your biggest defense against shariah dick in your ass

Israel is the entire REASON the world is suffering from Islamic terrorism.

It’s a nation the size of New Jersey with the population of NYC that provides absolutely no benefit to the American people, yet we give them $4 BILLION every year and allow them to control our government.

>>160893
>Leading conservatives go on and on about how the Israel is america's greatest ally.

Obama gave Israel a $38 BILLION increase in the free money American tax payers fork over for nothing in return and as we can see from the article above, this blatant attack on the 1st Amendment is being supported by both the Reps and Dems.

>>160902
>Wow it's like you retards have never heard of the judicial branch. This shot would be stricken down in a heartbeat.

You mean like when the Supremes said ObamaCare is a “tax”, that forces Americans to pay for insurance from private and for-profit Wall Street corporations that we have zero control over and if we refuse, the IRS will simply take our money and give it to the private and for-profit corporations?...

>>160926
when you talk about the big leagues, yes. All politicians bow down to Israel, even in Europe politicians scramble to apologize for the holocaust and how they're country should've down more.

But the republicans are much more open for their support of Israel and their voting base reflects that. Dem voters tend to be more anti-israel, but the bigshots in the party silently go along with the republicans on this issue.
Also, I wonder how many of the Democratic congressman support the bill just happen to be dual-Israeli citizens.

>>160929
>How many happen to be dual Israeli citizens.
We really need to outlaw dual citizens from serving as public officials. How can we be sure that they are working in America's best interests when they are unwilling to cut ties to a foreign nation?

>>160940
>We really need to outlaw dual citizens from serving as public officials. How can we be sure that they are working in America's best interests when they are unwilling to cut ties to a foreign nation?

You mean like Rahm Emanuel, who served on the board of Freddie Mac prior to the housing bubble collapse and later was Obama Chief of Staff and is now Mayor Chicago but when Desert Storm was brewing, he went to Israel to serve in their army?….

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel

>>160943
Specific, but sure.

>>160143
wrote my reps and was told to fuck off lmao.

>>160940
If they are willing to send american citizens to jail for protesting their preferred nation, then yes

>>160451
This would be a great point if the US didn't have the highest degree of gun violence among first world countries.

We can still have the right to bear arms without letting literal mental patients have access to guns.

>>161019

There’s already a thread about guns; >>160918 so why are you trying to slide the discussion in this thread off the subject?

>>160285
"If you want to find out who controls you, find out who you're not allowed to criticize?"

Think it was something like that.

>>161239

You’ve got to hand it to the Jews though, they’ve managed to take control of the U.S. and Europe despite being 2% or less of the general population.

>>161019
>US didn't have the highest degree of gun violence among first world countries.

Minus the niggers, it would be much, much lower.

I know you're thinking "lol, just a low-effort /pol/tard", but I'm absolutely right, go look it up.

The US congress is bought off by jews. The medial is controlled by jews. Hollywood is controlled by jews. The Federal Reserve is run by jews. Getting the picture yet?

Good to see Dems and Republicans unifying together as kike puppets.

>>161293
Isn't that even more reason to have good gun control?

>>161638
They're also the primary victims of gum crime, so it works out well us in the long run.