Arizona netizens outraged over internet censorship bill

Does this article – or maybe just the headline – annoy, offend or terrify you? If so, it may soon be illegal in Arizona.

The state's legislature has passed a bill which would update an existing telephone harassment law to apply to the Internet and other forms of electronic communication.  The problem, though, is that it dramatically broadens the scope, making it potentially criminal to even marginally offend someone when they aren’t even the target of the “offensive” communication.

As outlined by the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, “the bill is sweepingly broad, and would make it a crime to communicate – via any electronic means – speech that is intended to 'annoy,' 'offend,' 'harass' or 'terrify,' as well as certain sexual speech. Because the bill is not limited to one-to-one communications, House Bill 2549 would apply to the Internet as a whole, thus criminalizing all manner of writing, cartoons, and other protected material the state finds offensive or annoying."

The lawmakers’ concern is quite understandable: more and more stories of cyber bullying appear every day, and racially, sexually and morally offensive comments and interactions are, sadly, a frequent sight on the web. 

But in their rush to protect Arizona citizens from harm, legislators seem to have forgotten one key thing: to define all those terms that they are trying to deem punishable. 

Words like ‘lewd’ or ‘profane’ are not defined by statute, or in reference. Most people understand ‘lewd’ to mean of a lusty or sexual nature, and ‘profane’ is disrespectful of religious beliefs and practices. And how does one define ‘annoying,’ when it’s so individual? 

Section one of this law is so vague, in fact, that a person could be prosecuted because a friend of a friend of a friend found a Facebook post offensive. Which is ridiculous, as I, for example, get annoyed by my friends posting carefree vacation updates while I’m stuck behind a desk at work. And I get terrified by people posting pictures of the sphynx, the hairless cats which everyone colloquially refers to as naked. (Speaking of which, if they are ‘naked’ and someone posts their pictures, does that constitute lewd online conduct?) 

I’m also pretty sure we all know people who would be offended by religious discourse of the ‘is there a God?’ 

RT Source

A convicted JDL anti-Semitism militant has the nerve to say this: ‘Lying Coward Ron Paul And His Nazi Racist Newsletters’

edit (removal)of picture of Victore Vancier and the pedophile claims  taken down due to this comment, and newsnet14 doesn’t need the headache of arguing with this:  Rubystars

January 3, 2012 – 8:59 am(Edit)

Hello I’m a moderator on the English forum also known by the handle Rubystars there. If you want to confirm this then contact me and I will confirm that I’m the owner of the listed e-mail address.

It’s true that Chaim ben Pesach (Also known as Victor Vancier) was involved in JDL bombings and was a JDL chairman in the past. He speaks about this on the forum and in various archived “Ask JTF” broadcasts. Chaim has explained why he did what he did. Even if you don’t agree with the tactics he used, bringing this up is irrelevant to the points he’s making about Ron Paul. It’s an ad-hominem attack against Chaim rather than addressing the legitimate points he brings up about Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is anti-Semitic and dangerous for America’s future and many others besides Chaim are recognizing this and talking about it.

The accusations about the pedophile stuff were fabrications made by enemies associated with a left wing Jewish group called Peace Now. These people have made other fakes as well. Left wing Jews like those at Peace Now despise Chaim because he opposes their leftist agenda. Chaim is against the NWO agenda and leftist policies and left wing Jews and Gentiles both resent that and try to make up lies about him to discredit him. It’s very irresponsible to promote this fake information and present it as true. If you care about your site’s credibility you will take that part of your article down.

shera~

This guys name is Victor Vancier. Apparently, he spent 5yrs. in federal prison for his involvement in 18 bombings in New York and Washington. 18 bombings? Only 5 years? But i’m sure his name isn’t on any SPLC list… Thank you Harry L Hughes III for the video.

Prison for Ex-J.D.L. Chief in  Bombing  October 27, 1987

A former head of the Jewish Defense League was sentenced yesterday to 10 years in Federal prison for taking part in a series of ”terrorist bombings” in the New York area since 1984 to protest Soviet treatment of Jews.

Official Confirmation of JDL Terrorism

The US Justice Department’s Federal Bureau of Investigation has repeatedly characterized the JDL as a terrorist and criminal organization. A report issued in 1985 by the FBI’s Terrorist Research and Analytical Center confirmed: (note 55)

In FBI terrorism analyses published since 1981, responsibility for 18 terrorist incidents has been attributed to groups seeking to publicize past and present injustices suffered by the Jewish people. While claims for some of these acts have been made in the names of the “Jewish Defenders,’ “United Jewish Underground,” and “Jewish Direct Action,” 15 of the incidents were attributed to the Jewish Defense League (JDL), by far the most well known of these groups.

Also in 1985, the FBI named the Jewish Defense League as the second most active terrorist group in the United States. (Only Puerto Rican terrorists were more active during this period.) The FBI linked the JDL to 37 terrorist attacks carried out from 1977 to 1984. (note 56) Two years later, the FBI announced that Jewish extremist groups had carried out 24 terrorist acts from 1981 through 1986, 17 of which were the work of the Jewish Defense League. (note 57)

Among the incidents was a firebombing at Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center on Oct. 20, 1986, the day of a scheduled performance by the Moscow State Symphony. The firebomb damaged the stage-door entrance but caused no injuries.

In sentencing the defendant, Victor Vancier, 30 years old, of Whitestone, Queens, Judge I. Leo Glasser of Federal District Court in Brooklyn sternly told him, ”You don’t go bombing innocent people to make a point.”

He said he regarded Mr. Vancier as ”a danger to this community” and, at the request of the Federal prosecutor, Charles E. Rose, he revoked Mr. Vancier’s $1 million bail. According to the authorities, Mr. Vancier served as national chairman of the J.D.L. from April 1985 until November 1986. Two Others Sentenced

In separate sessions earlier in the day, Judge Glasser sentenced two other former members of the militant organization, founded in 1968 by Rabbi Meir Kahaneto combat anti-Semitism.

One of them, Murray Young, 60, of East Meadow, L.I., was sentenced to five years in prison. The other, Sharon Katz, 44, of West 57th Street in Manhattan, was given a suspended three-year prison sentence and six months of house arrest as part of a five-year probationary term.

”I have no justification for what I did,” Mr. Vancier said before his sentence was imposed. He said he realized that his actions had not helped his cause. And he asked for a new chance to build a constructive life.More at source

Founding Fathers, The Hell-Fire Club; Sex, Politics, and Religion in Eighteenth-Century England

by Daniel Willens

Gnosis, Summer 1992

 On moonlit nights during the reign of England’s King George III, immensely powerful members of His Majesty’s Government, important intellectuals, and influential artists could sometimes be seen travelling up the Thames River by gondola to a ruined abbey near West Wycombe. There, to the sonorous tolling of the deconsecrated cloister’s bell, they dressed in monkish robes and indulged in every manner of depravity, culminating in a Black Mass celebrated on the naked body of a debauched noblewoman and presided over by that notorious rake Sir Francis Dashwood. Their diabolical devotions concluded, the inner circle would adjourn to plot the course of the British Empire.

This “unholy sodalily,” as it has been called, styled themselves, with suitably Gothic flair, “The Friars of St. Francis of Medmenham,” though they have been immortalized by their popular epithet “The Hell-Fire Club.” In that gossipy age there was much speculation about the infernal activities of the society, and in 1765, Charles Johnstone published a roman a clef entitled Chrysal, or the Adventures of a Guinea, which was popularly believed to reveal the secrets of the “Medmenham Monks.”

Unfortunately for those whose prurient tastes are tempered with a dose of critical scholarship, the Hell-Fire Club does not live up to its reputation. Most of the contemporary writers who allude to “Saint Francis” and his “Brotherhood” at Medmenham Abbey had an ax to grind, and the Monks themselves were so secretive that some modern historians have concluded that the whole thing was mere fiction. (1) But perhaps now, over two centuries later, we can attempt to sketch the Hell-Fire Club against the background of its time, tentatively pencilling in the enigmatic features of its putative high priest, Sir Francis Dashwood, Baron Le Despencer.

THE CLUB’S PRECURSORS

Although the Medmenham Monks are the most famous band to be dignified with the appellation, they were certainly not the original Hell-Fire Club. The first half of the century saw the establishment of many circles of rakehells throughout the British Isles, and tales of their activities have often been transferred to Dashwood’s group. (2)

For our purposes the Monks’ most important precursor is the Hell-Fire Club founded around 1719 in London by Philip, Duke of Wharton (1698-1731). (3) Wharton was a prominent Whig politician, Freemason, and atheist who sought to ridicule religion by publicly presiding over festive gatherings with “Satanic” trappings. These meetings were often held in a tavern near St. James’s Square, although a nearby riding academy was sometimes pressed into service to permit the attendance of ladies of good reputation who could not be decently expected to be seen in a public house.

Of the female members, one in particular stands out: Lady Mary Wortley Montagu

THE FLEDGLING RAKE

Portrait of Sir Francis Dashwood From a sign in the Hellfire Caves

Francis Dashwood was born in 1708 into an illustrious line of Turkey merchants (6) who had raised themselves into the ranks of the aristocracy by a combination of hard work, political prowess, and strategic marriage. Dashwood’s mother died when he was two years of age and he was soon packed off to Eton for his education. Upon hearing of his father’s death in 1724, he locked himself in a cellar for a week to get drunk.

In 1726, the fledging rake left England for his grand tour of the Continent. To Dashwood’s credit, it must be said that this trip did inspire him with admiration for more than fine wine and courtesans. While in Florence, he made the acquaintance of the Catholic Jacobite Freemason Abbe Nicolini and was entered in the English Lodge there.

THE HELL-FIRE CLUB

Tradition asserts that Dashwood’s Hell-Fire Club originally met in London at the George and Vulture Inn. (19) It is possible that Dashwood and his friends gathered in a public house to revel in the freedom now implicitly granted to witches, resurrecting Wharton’s Hell-Fire Club in a spirit of mockery. On the other hand, in the early eighteenth century taverns were frequently the meeting places for Masonic lodges, so it is also quite possible that the nascent Hell-Fire Club was a cabal of Jacobite Freemason s. Indeed it might very well have been both.

THE HELLFIRE CAVES

“Mysteries of the Hellfire Caves and the Church of St. Lawrence.” For those who know anything about this period of 18th century British History the mention of the “Hellfire Clubs” seems to provoke swift and polarised reactions.Some immediately respond with mutterings of dark satanic rites and debauchery of the most extreme kind while others simply laugh at the wild tales and dismiss them as exaggerations.  The elusive truth is probably somewhere in the middle – a very complicated middle!This section of the Aquiziam website focuses on the “club” and “caves” established by Sir Francis Dashwood which has assumed the reputation of being a “Hellfire Society” although, allegedly it never officially referred to itself as such – perhaps because of government edict outlawing the “Hellfire” clubs in1721.

SEX AND POLITICS

Dashwood married Sarah Gould in 1745, but in an era when prostitution was the surest means for a woman to advance in society and the fate of nations might be determined by syphilis-spawned madness, it would have been unnatural for the Medmenham Monks not to have had some sexual aura about them. Legend portrays the Monks as indulging in sadomasochistic orgies, but given the rumours about Lady Mary Wortley Montagu and the Divan Club, one might well wonder if there is not a hint of Oriental sex magic in all this.

Certainly the monks engaged in ribald jesting. One of their members, probably the satirist George Selwyn, praised the Earl of Sandwich’s sexual prowess in an Anglo-Saxon-laced lampoon of Popes Essay on Man.

RELIGION

In 1773 Dashwood and Benjamin Franklin revised the Book of Common Prayer – an odd activity for a supposed Satanist. Possibly the two Freemasons were trying to bring the Anglican Church in line with Masonic Deism. In his introduction to this work, Dashwood stressed the usefulness of the church to the community and affirms the teachings of Jesus Christ in such a way that his allegiance to the Church of England is equivocal at best. Most of their changes involve removing all references to the Old Testament and eliminating repetitions wherever possible. This liturgy is still used by some Protestant sects in America. (31)

The whole question of religion is central to the fascination that Dashwood continues to exercise.

Texas: ATS Labels Anti-Traffic Camera Initiatives Racist

Traffic camera firm invokes 1965 civil rights bill to stop votes in Baytown and Houston, Texas that would ban red light cameras.
The citizen-led groups that want the public to decide the future of red light cameras are racist, according to lawsuits filed by American Traffic Solutions (ATS) in a pair of Texas cities. The Arizona-based photo enforcement firm filed in a state court in Baytown on Thursday and then an ATS-funded front group filed an identical case in a federal court in Houston on Friday. Residents in both cities signed petitions placing a ban on automated ticketing machines onto the November 2 ballot, but ATS cites the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 as a reason to block these votes.

“Because the camouflaged referendum has been improperly placed on the ballot, a potential for racial discrimination exists,” Houston lawyer Andy Taylor wrote on behalf of ATS. “More specifically, minority voters may lose their ability to elect candidates of their choice in local, statewide and federal offices.”

The ATS claim may come as a surprise to the diverse groups behind anti-camera petition efforts elsewhere in the country. In East Cleveland, Ohio the group Black on Black Crime led the effort to gather signatures for a referendum. In Cincinnati, the anti-camera coalition included the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Green Party. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has also battled cameras in Iowa and Rhode Island. Baytown initiative sponsor Byron Schirmbeck suggested the traffic camera industry was disguising its true aim with the racism charge.

The Chronicle has no evidence to support this claim first developed by ATS hired gun Jim McGrath. more