In Which Y'r Ob'd't S'v't endeavors to unpack the implications of the systemic, officials' denials that HR 347 is aimed at and meant to interfere with forecast protests during the campaign/Occupy season, and demurs.
Hola, Hippies of the WORLD!! Paz a nosotros toda, el mundo entero.
Hello! I'm John Konopak, a citizen journalist in Albuquerque, New Mexico with a "Citizens' Dispatch"!
Recently, with uncharacteristically little public notice, the O'bomber signed into law a certain "HR Three Forty Seven."
Now, in case you have NOT been hanging on every post in the Left Blogosphere for the last two weeks, and instead have been enjoying the beguilements of an actual life--a job, a family, hobbies, you know, that kind of thing--and never heard of HR 347 (or it's Senate companion, S 1794), Well, that's why I'm here. Just something more to worry about...
HR 347 is the legislative shorthand identifier for the piece of legislation given the inocuous title, the "Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011." It raised hackles and red flags all over "our" side, since it involved restrictions on citizens lawful movement in areas where the Secret Service exercised its protective authority, and what was in fact lawful.
Just in time for the onset of what--with the elections, conventions, Occupiers, resistors and other insurgencies--is gonna be a LONG year of seeking redress of grievances, St. Barry the Timid and the gutless, gormless, feckless COngress up-graded an obscure law to make it possible for the forces of "law and order, peace, justice, and the American way" to fuck wicha more efficiently, if you cherish the temerity seeking redress in the old fashioned way: by making PUBLIC trouble for them with a little creative trespassing, at a Convention, say, or a rally where the participants are "under the protection of" the Secret Service.
The bill, which Obombster quietly signed March 8,changed some of the terms of a previous measure pertaining to the definition of criminal trespass under certain "security" conditions, the conditions under which a crime may be prosecuted, and the penalties which could be assessed for such behavior. It grants certain, additional discretionary latitude to the Secret Service, too.
Everybody--all the "serious" people of the CorpoRat/SCUM "commentariat"--said it was nothing. Even the ACLU: a well-placed spokesflak, Gabe Rottman, was at pains to paint a placid, reassuring picture. It's nothing to worry about, they say. As in: if we--the ACLU--are undisturbed, you oughta just relax... (Firedog Lake has a somewhat different take). There are links on my blog: www.blogito-ergo.blogspot.com. But the predominant message was to chill.
And so you might, unless you look at what did change in the newest version, and look t it in the light of the upsets and turmoil occasioned hitherto and invisioned for the future as the season advances. The question is: If it changes nothing, then why'd they change it? Well, they explain, it only changes a couple of leetle, teeeny weeny bitty lil thangs, a couple of words here and there. Housecleaning. It's nothing. Really.
(Aside) I cannot say how it is where you are, but here in the USofA, our Congresscritters are always real busy doing whatever it is that they need to do RIGHT NOW to fuck with us. So they rarely have or make time revisit anything. And so they only ever seem to revisit laws when they want to make it easier to fuck with you even more, and have some new ideas. Notice that? You START with rights, and liberties, and freedoms, and shit, but every little change takes another nibble, and pretty soon, shee-it! Habeas Corpus is GONE! And that's the kind of change this is.
HR347 broadens the discretion of prosecutors and the Secret Service to detain people, and makes it easier to convict 'em.
Hitherto, under the original language of the law, you had to act "willfully and knowingly" when committing the crime. In short, you had to know your conduct was illegal. Under H.R. 347, you will simply need to act "knowingly," which here would mean that you know you're in a restricted area, but not necessarily that you're committing a crime. That's not a small change. That's a BIG difference. And it won't expire with the current incumbent, either.
Under the revised law, all they have to prove is that you "perps" KNOWINGLY violated the prohibited zone. It's a felony. And even the ACLU agrees that the Law "is part of the set of laws that make (the risibly, so-called Free-Speech" Zones) possible, and should be seen in this context." Well, duh...
Now, let's get this straight, from the jump. The WHOLE POINT of such laws as this one is to provide warrant--what they call "grounds"--to interfere with, detain, arrest and CHARGE "unauthorized" people making trouble for the Secret Service security by exercising their rights. The purpose is to up the stakes on demonstrations, and to fuck with the demonstrators civil liberties.
Though the Secret Service and the Congress--which passed it goddam nearly unanimously--will claim its purpose is to improve security, that's a charade. In the real world, "improving security" always means "fuckin' wicha": screwing with somebody who wasn't being screwed with before. ALL the changes were aimed at prosecuting violators, not at preventing acts.
This revision seems to have been enacted for the purpose of ensnaring MORE demonstrators and protestore--CITIZENS--in MORE violations which are EASIER to "prove" and win coinvictions for...
An' if that ain't fucking wicha, well--like the ol blues goes: Then chicken ain't poultry, and grits ain't groceries and Mona Lisa Was a MAN, hippies.
No comments:
Post a Comment