US government wants bloggers to register

Legislation has been introduced by U.S. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) to require registration of bloggers with more than 500 readers. To register (in other words, ask permission to enjoin in a priviledge) and become regulated (taxation is one form of regulation) means being subject to administrative, bureaucratic control. Once registered, failure to comply then most assuredly renders one subject to government force and violence. By my posting here, and assuming the readers of 911blogger to exceed 500, then I would be required to register. I ain't gonna do it. 911blogger readers in Louisiana, it's time to call your senator out.

Actually, I see this as a good sign. This means that they are afraid, very afraid. The government, the mainstream media, the globalist elite are very afraid. However, as to be expected and just like any cornered animal, they are lashing out ferociously in their defense. This is only the beginning.... so, get ready. The full text of three articles on Vitter's bill, with links, can be found below the rest of my two-cents worth.

The Bill of Rights contains ten amendments to the Constitution. Most Americans do not know, understand, or possess the ability to comprehend what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights really say, even though they were written in the plain English of the day. The Bill of Rights is an inseparable and inextricable part of the Constitution. Without the Bill of Rights being added to the Constitution, the requisite number of states to ratify the Constitution could not have been reached.

The Declaration of Independence is "organic law." The Constitution is "fundamental law", and is derived from the principals, reasoning, and causes for the Declaration of Independence to be written. Father to son. Mother to daughter. From the Preamble to the Bill of Rights (Yes Martha, there really is a preamble to the Bill of Rights.):

"THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses [my emphasis] should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."

The Rights discussed in the Bill of Rights are by no means an exhaustive list (see Ninth Amendment), as the founders thought it would be tedious to even attempt to enumerate all individual Rights. But what is of paramount importance is that these Rights are INDIVIDUAL Rights. These are not collective, or group rights. A group is merely a collection of individuals and therefore, an abstraction. The Tenth Amendment is a reminder to CONgress of the limitation to it's power and authority. Just in case CONgress forgets, the Tenth Amendment tells it where to find it's limited and enumerated powers and authority. duh. But, here's where things get interesting.

The only legitimate function of government is to protect and defend our Individual Rights. For the government to require bloggers/Individuals to register and punish those who fail to do so would amount to converting the exercise of a Right (one in which it is the duty of the government to protect and defend) into a crime.

"The claim and exercise of a constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. 486, 489.

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional Rights." Snerer vs. Cullen, 481 F. 946.

"The state cannot diminish Rights of the people." Hurtado vs. California, 110 US 516.

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda, supra.

First Amendment
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or 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."

Let's read that again, shall we:

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW abridging the freedom of speech;

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW abridging the freedom the press;

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble;

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW abridging the right of the people peaceably to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

(To better understand the forgotten Right to Petition, see chapter 61 of the Magna Carta. Then you will know why the Second Amendment is where it is.)

Remember, these are Individual Rights, not rights or priviledges granted to a group or collective. NYT, LAT, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, ad nauseum are coprorations, NOT individuals. Their existence is owed by the "priviledge" of corporate status granted by government. Therefore, it is these corporations that are subject to the whims of CONgress and the globalist's minions, like Vitter, who occupy seats in it's chambers like maggots on rotting flesh.

If you don't know your Rights, you can't possibly defend them. And, the only Rights you have are those Rights you are willing to defend.

Get it? I hope so!

Now get out there and fight the New World Order. <[:-P

Oh, if anything here is news to you, git u one of dees 'cause u need it:

Citizen's Rule Book:

http://apfn.org/pdf/citizen.pdf

Articles and links:

US government wants bloggers to register.

Silent majority must become known

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37033

By Nick Farrell: Thursday 18 January 2007, 07:38
THE US GOVERNMENT is planning to force bloggers who criticise Congress and organise grassroot causes to register themselves or face jail time.

According to GrassrootsFreedom.com, under Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill currently before the Senate, bloggers who have more than 500 readers will have to register and report quarterly to Congress just like lobbiests or go to jail.

GrassrootsFreedom.com chairman Richard Viguerie said the new law would create the most expansive intrusion on First Amendment rights ever.

The amendment was introduced by Senator David Vitter and is currently on hold as it seems to have got bogged down in the legislative process. It would be interesting to find a bog that is read by more than 500 people.

Congress to Send Critics to Jail, Says Richard Viguerie

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=...

Congress Wants to Blame the Grassroots for Its Own Corruption

MANASSAS, Va., Jan. 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a
statement by Richard A. Viguerie, Chairman of GrassrootsFreedom.com,
regarding legislation currently being considered by Congress to regulate
grassroots communications:
"In what sounds like a comedy sketch from Jon Stewart's Daily Show, but
isn't, the U. S. Senate would impose criminal penalties, even jail time, on
grassroots causes and citizens who criticize Congress.
"Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill currently before the
Senate, would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to
500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report
quarterly to Congress the same as the big K Street lobbyists. Section 220
would amend existing lobbying reporting law by creating the most expansive
intrusion on First Amendment rights ever. For the first time in history,
critics of Congress will need to register and report with Congress itself.
"The bill would require reporting of 'paid efforts to stimulate
grassroots lobbying,' but defines 'paid' merely as communications to 500 or
more members of the public, with no other qualifiers.
"On January 9, the Senate passed Amendment 7 to S. 1, to create
criminal penalties, including up to one year in jail, if someone 'knowingly
and willingly fails to file or report.'
"That amendment was introduced by Senator David Vitter (R-LA). Senator
Vitter, however, is now a co-sponsor of Amendment 20 by Senator Robert
Bennett (R-UT) to remove Section 220 from the bill. Unless Amendment 20
succeeds, the Senate will have criminalized the exercise of First Amendment
rights. We'd be living under totalitarianism, not democracy.
"I started GrassrootsFreedom.com to fight efforts to silence the
grassroots. The website provides updates in the legislation and has a
petition to sign opposing Section 220.
"Thousands of nonprofit leaders, bloggers, and other citizens have
hammered the Senate with calls in opposition to Section 220, which seeks to
silence the grassroots. The criminal provisions will scare citizens into
silence.
"The legislation regulates small, legitimate nonprofits, bloggers, and
individuals, but creates loopholes for corporations, unions, and large
membership organizations that would be able to spend literally hundreds of
millions of dollars, yet not report.
"Congress is trying to blame the grassroots, which are American
citizens engaging in their First Amendment rights, for Washington's
internal corruption problems."
CONTACT: Mark Fitzgibbons, +1-703-392-7676 or +1-703-408-3775, for
GrassrootsFreedom.com.

Stop Congress from Silencing Its Critics
NEWS FLASH

http://www.grassrootsfreedom.com/gw3/articles-home/articles.php?action=v...

The Senate would make exercising your First Amendment rights a crime. The Senate voted 93 – 2 to amend S. 1 to include criminal penalties for knowing and willful reporting failures. That would include when the government thinks you should have known to report and civil disobedience. See the vote:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm....

In the first few days of the new session of Congress, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and big Washington insiders such as Public Citizen and Common Cause will try to silence critics by regulating us through quarterly reports to Congress. Failure to report would result in civil and potential criminal penalties.

We need to act fast to keep Congress from silencing us. We have the First Amendment right to speak and urge citizens to contact Washington—without the intimidation inherent in federal regulation of our activities.

Pelosi & Company’s lobbying legislation “reform” would define political communications to and even between citizens as “lobbying.” This turns the definition of lobbying on its head and is in violation of the First Amendment.

Moreover, their legislation would treat grassroots activists more harshly than the K Street lobbyists and the big corporations and unions. They get loopholes that the smallest critics using the Internet wouldn’t enjoy. Communicating to as few as 500 people would trigger the registration and quarterly reporting to Congress.

In truth, the grassroots legislation would help protect corruption in Washington by silencing critics and diminishing the ability of grassroots causes to communicate with the general public.

This may be the biggest threat to free speech ever!

We’ll keep you updated on developments, but you need to act NOW. Sign our petition to start.

Richard A. Viguerie

These threats are becomming very serious! Here is related

article: Anti-First Amendment S.1 Passes Congress

It was bad enough George Bush Senior found it necessary to blame bloggers for creating what he deems an “adversarial and ugly climate” (never mind his particular bit of ugliness in Iraq more than a decade ago, eventually resulting in the murder of more than a million people), last month we had the Manchurian candidate, John McCain, introducing legislation “that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards, effectively nixing the open exchange of ideas on the Internet, providing a lethal injection for unrestrained opinion, and acting as the latest attack tool to chill freedom of speech on the world wide web,” as Paul Joseph Watson writes for Prison Planet....

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/190107Amendment.htm

american constitution says

american constitution says freedom of the press---

good news..bad news

lot of balloney floating on this bill

dont want to add to it

"Amendment 20 succeeds"
so the anti-blogger item is removed

But CONgress is still CONgress

they start this fear mongering with verbosity and vagueness

MAYBE a lil psyche-ops on this one?

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...

This article is not accurate

Please read the law before you post something like this. This is not about grassroots lobbying. "Paid" is not defined as more communicating to more than 500 people, it is defined as $25,000 per quarter.

This is Richard Viguerie's business, and he has every interest in distorting what this law is about.

Unless you get paid more than $25,000/quarter, you don't have to register. You could mail or call a million people, and you wouldn't have to register. You could get paid a million dollars a year to write a blog about 9/11 inside job, as long as you don't urge citizens to contact Congress about a specific matter. If you get paid more than $25,000 to maintain a blog or website that urges people to contact Congress on a specific issue, the question would arise if that is a paid attempt to influence more than 500 people to contact Congress on a specific issue.

I'm not saying this is a good law -- I don't know what problem they are addressing, whether it is a problem, and if this is good way to address it. But this law is not what Viguerie says it is.

I see Prison Planet writing on this uncritically. This is why I don't rely on them for information.

Read the law for yourself.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/~c110fNDyLG:e38473:

SEC. 220. DISCLOSURE OF PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING.

(a) Definitions- Section 3 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1602) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end of the following: `Lobbying activities include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, but do not include grassroots lobbying.'; and

(2) by adding at the end of the following:

`(17) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- The term `grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same.

`(18) PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING-

`(A) IN GENERAL- The term `paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders.

`(B) PAID ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR SEGMENTS THEREOF- The term `paid attempt to influence the general public or segments thereof' does not include an attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the general public.

`(C) REGISTRANT- For purposes of this paragraph, a person or entity is a member of a registrant if the person or entity--

`(i) pays dues or makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount to the entity;

`(ii) makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount of time to the entity;

`(iii) is entitled to participate in the governance of the entity;

`(iv) is 1 of a limited number of honorary or life members of the entity; or

`(v) is an employee, officer, director or member of the entity.

`(19) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRM- The term `grassroots lobbying firm' means a person or entity that--

`(A) is retained by 1 or more clients to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying on behalf of such clients; and

`(B) receives income of, or spends or agrees to spend, an aggregate of $25,000 or more for such efforts in any quarterly period.'.

(b) Registration- Section 4(a) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603(a)) is amended--

(1) in the flush matter at the end of paragraph (3)(A), by adding at the end the following: `For purposes of clauses (i) and (ii), the term `lobbying activities' shall not include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.'; and

(2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:

`(4) FILING BY GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRMS- Not later than 45 days after a grassroots lobbying firm first is retained by a client to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, such grassroots lobbying firm shall register with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives.'.

(c) Separate Itemization of Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying- Section 5(b) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(b)) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (3), by--

(A) inserting after `total amount of all income' the following: `(including a separate good faith estimate of the total amount of income relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and

(B) inserting `or a grassroots lobbying firm' after `lobbying firm';

(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting after `total expenses' the following: `(including a good faith estimate of the total amount of expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that total amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

`Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) shall not apply with respect to reports relating to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying activities.'.

(d) Good Faith Estimates and De Minimis Rules for Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 5(c) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(c)) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) Estimates of Income or Expenses- For purposes of this section, the following shall apply:

`(1) Estimates of income or expenses shall be made as follows:

`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $10,0000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.

`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $10,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $10,000 for the reporting period.

`(2) Estimates of income or expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying shall be made as follows:

`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $25,000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.

`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $25,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $25,000 for the reporting period.'.

(2) TAX REPORTING- Section 15 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1610) is amended--

(A) in subsection (a)--

(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;

(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and

(iii) by adding at the end the following:

`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.'; and

(B) in subsection (b)--

(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;

(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and

(iii) by adding at the end the following:

`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.'.

PP

PP has been overstating issues as has Kurt Nimo

I do read PP but this important bill should have been a watch and wait before launching more info.

I too thought it was reality til someone alerted me that
the anti-blogger item was removed.

What anti-blogger item?

What anti-blogger item? Who introduced it, and what did it say?

You are doing the same thing.

Everything is available online:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.00001:

Please find this "anti-blogger item" and post it here.

I looked and didn't find anything, but it could be there. I'm not going to pore through it to definitely disprove an unfounded statement that is implausible to begin with.

I posted the original text, not the text as passed.

Vitter's Amendment 7 here,

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r1102kjKep:e34002:

did add Section 223, which provides for criminal penalties of up to 10 years, not 1.

He then sponsored Amendment 20 to take out regulation of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.

I'm not going to go through and compare all the changes. You would also have to look at the law that this bill amends.

Regardless, since the beginning, the bill in question is designed to regulate `paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying,' not grassroots lobbying itself. This not "anti-blogger." How many bloggers get paid more than $25,000/quarter to tell people to contact Congress on a specific matter?

Viguierie is the king of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, and doesn't want to be regulated, so he writes lies about the bill at his website. Grassrootsfreedom.com was registered in early December 2006, and deals only with this bill.

Russ Feingold voted for it, and the thing passed 98-2.

More Alex Jones "police state" hyperbole.

MAYBE

you can lighten up on my mistake
I did NOT appreciate it.

"You are doing the same thing"

thats my best effort ..to make sense of this very confusing issue..
oher forums have referred to it in same manner as the anti-blogger item.

save your hostitly for the PTB.

"1/2 Vote Result: Amendment Agreed to
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 20 to S.Amdt. 3 to S. 1
Statement of Purpose: To strike a provision relating to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.

"Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill currently before the Senate, would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report quarterly to Congress the same as the big K Street lobbyists. Section 220 would amend existing lobbying reporting law by creating the most expansive intrusion on First Amendment rights ever.

For the first time in history, critics of Congress will need to register and report with Congress itself.

"The bill would require reporting of 'paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying,' but defines 'paid' merely as communications to 500 or more members of the public, with no other qualifiers.

"On January 9, the Senate passed Amendment 7 to S. 1, to create criminal penalties, including up to one year in jail, if someone 'knowingly and willingly fails to file or report.'

"That amendment was introduced by Senator David Vitter (R-LA). Senator Vitter, however, is now a co-sponsor of Amendment 20 by Senator Robert Bennett (R-UT) to remove Section 220 from the bill. Unless Amendment 20 succeeds, the Senate will have criminalized the exercise of First Amendment rights. We'd be living under totalitarianism, not democracy."
"

You should be thanking me

You posted a completely inaccurate article which I corrected. So you respond with another inaccuracy that I spent more time correcting. However many forums are discussing this, it all appears to come from the same biased source.

None of this would have been necessary if you had been more careful about the information you were posting. 9/11 is serious business, not a game, and it's not about your feelings. I don't want you or anyone else wasting their time, energy, and credibility on a lie. You should be thanking me for taking the time to research the bill and correct Viguierie's misinformation.

Maybe you should lighten up on me, and direct your anger toward the person that deserves it, Viguerie. You don't seem to understand that he is the PTB, or their tool.

And if you see you made a mistake, why are you posting Viguierie's lies again?