Rutherford Institute: The Secret Police and Political Dissent

[PhilipShore]

Rutherford Institute
The Secret Police and Political Dissent
by John W. Whitehead
2/6/2006

http://www.rutherford.org/articles_db/commentary.asp?record_id=387


Once upon a time, a handful of colonists, fed up with being arrested and jailed for speaking out, decided to take on the British Empire. These great dissenters won the war. And when it came time to write the Constitution, they made sure that they included the rights to free speech and to protest by enshrining these essential freedoms in the First Amendment.

Unfortunately, many of us have not learned the lessons that our forefathers tried to teach us. Indeed, as we move further into the new millennium, the American government increasingly resembles the empire against which our ancestors fought.

This fact was made abundantly clear with the passage of the USA Patriot Act and more recently with the revelation that President Bush bypassed federal law in approving warrantless electronic surveillance of Americans. And a new bill, sponsored by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), gives the Secret Service unbridled authority to suppress political dissent—one of the most basic and essential elements of democracy.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

1. Isn't this the same character that helped the Paula Jones lawsuit?

I think so, I remember the Rutherford Institute being involved in what looked to me like partisan RW politics.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks!

[desi]

2. One and the same...

..he was front and center in the witch hunt against the last duly elected president...

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. So, who's sorry now?

[desi]

6. One thing about these gadflys...

..they will never admit being wrong OR apologize.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

10. Actually, this group looks like they have some integrity

They are calling Bush on his bullshit.

I don't agree with their role in the witch hunt, but they are being useful now.

[bryant69]

4. Looks like a libertarian group - i don't know about involvement in

the Paula Jones Group - they are certainly done on Clinton. But they are also concerned about George W. Bush. Hooray for consistency.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[enough]

3. Specter's new bill:

snip>

The proposed law, with the Orwellian title “Secret Service Authorization and Technical Modification Act of 2005,” states: “It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons to willfully and knowingly enter any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.” Without defining what a “special event of national significance” is, the provision continues: “It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons to willfully, knowingly, and with intent…engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any building or grounds designated a special event of national significance.” The phrase “engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct” is not defined, either. This means that whatever constitutes an event of “national significance” or “disruptive conduct” is left entirely to the discretion of the secret police.

snip>

[Jackpine Radical]

7. Wearing a T shirt with numbers on it

obviously counts as "disorderly or disruptive conduct."

[Rageneau]

8. Say, whatever happened to Larry Klayman?

He seemed to disappear from the 'liberal media' shortly after he started questioning Cheney and the BFEE. As long as it was Clinton's dingus he was talking about, he was on television every day. Now, neither he, not the Rutherford Institute, nor any of the other conservative institutions that demonstrated some actual integrity, can get their voices heard.

The "liberal" media won't allow these people airtime to criticize Republicans.

Gee, I sure wish our "liberal" media was on the side of us liberals.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

9. I just wish we still had journalists on TV and radio

All we have now are presstitutes.