-----Original Message-----
From: AriRashkae@aol.com [mailto:AriRashkae@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, August 13, 1999 8:12 AM
To: WADL@onelist.com
Subject: [WADL] Congress to ban "unapproved substances" web pages
From: AriRashkae@aol.com
This one is ridiculous! Copied from the StormWilliamsIn2K list.
<<Here's the posting I received on the matter.
(I suppose discernment is needed here as well as with anything you read.)
Thought Crimes! Senators Move to Criminalize Internet Content
The latest attempt to censor free access to information on the Internet goes
after discussions of "unapproved drugs." If these Senators have their way,
you may land in jail for merely linking to a page that talks about colloidal
silver. Join Y2K Newswire is taking a stand against this Orweillian
endeavor...
The Internet is bad for Big Government. It allows the free communication of
ideas that can't be controlled from Washington, and it allows the low-cost
education of the American public on ideas such as banking, economics and
taxes. China learned this early on and put in place filters that prevent
"unapproved" information from moving through the country's computer
networks. (All Internet access in China is government-monopolized). This
information, by the way, includes topics as dangerous as, say, meditation or
Buddhism -- both of which the Communist Chinese government considers a
threat to "state security." In fact, the Chinese government is currently
engaged in hacking these meditation web sites, destroying their content.
The United States government, as of late, seems eager to borrow as many
Commie-style controls from China as it can... and this effort isn't limited
only to Democrats. The latest is a proposed bill, now backed by eleven
Senators and sponsored by Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (Utah), hopes to
make it illegal to post or link to a web site that discusses the use of
unapproved drugs.
While the text of such a bill is not yet publicly available, it's no leap in
thinking to suppose it might apply to all unapproved drugs, not just hard
core ones like cocaine. Thus, if passed in such a form, the bill would give
the FDA total control over all drug-related web content.
Want to talk about colloidal silver on the web? Too bad: you'll do jail time
if Senators Hatch and Feinstein have their way. Want to link to a site that
talks about colloidal silver? Say hello to Ben Dover in cell number nine.
Want to discuss the all-natural herb, Stevia? You'll be a felon.
One step further and the law prevents you from bad-mouthing those substances
approved as "safe" by the FDA. Did your aunt go blind from drinking gallons
of aspartame-laced diet soda? You might someday go to jail for sharing that
on the 'net. It's "unapproved."
YOUR FREEDOM UNDER ATTACK
Let's face it: If such a bill were to pass, it would crush the freedoms
inherent in the Internet -- the very same freedoms that allow sites like Y2K
Newswire to exist. That's how any government takes away power from its
people, by the way: control the flow of information. Ever wonder why nearly
every mainstream media outlet keeps telling you Y2K has been solved even
though none of them have verified much beyond the so-called "facts" in the
press releases? It's because they are largely controlled by the same few
people. That way, all messages can be approved. And the message they want to
get out right now -- to save the banks, mostly -- is that Y2K is no big
deal.
Distributed information resources scare the heck out of every power-hungry
government. Any technology that gives individuals the power to cheaply reach
millions of other people is "dangerous" and must be immediately attacked.
That's exactly why this attack on "drug content" has begun. Once the bill is
passed and the public is comfortable with the intrusion, Senators will move
on to "guns." Should that succeed, (making it illegal to discuss guns on a
web page) the attack can continue into other "unapproved" areas.
In barely a generation, the Internet is 100% government-controlled, and you
have -- guess what? -- China! Courtesy of Republican and Democratic Senators
alike. The only politicians fighting this will be Libertarians. Congressman
Ron Paul, namely.
(This web site, by the way, is banned in China.)
If you want America to become Communist China, just sit back and do nothing.
On the other hand...
YOUR CALL TO (EASY) ACTION HAS ARRIVED
It is now time for you to do your part and blast these Senators for backing
this bill. Hit them with such a massive protest that they will never again
consider the censorship of the Internet.
Look at the list below, and if you find a Senator from your state, call them
and register your complaint.
Here are the resources:
Click here for the bill summary
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:s.01428:
SENATORS BACKING THE BILL
Sponsor: Orrin Hatch (Utah)
(202) 224-5251
senator_hatch@hatch.senate.gov
Sen Dianne Feinstein (California)
Phone: 202/224-3841
Fax: 202/228-3954
senator@feinstein.senate.gov
Sen Joseph Biden (Delaware)
Phone: 202-224-5042
Fax: 202-224-0139
Sen Christopher Bond (Missouri)
Phone: (202) 224-5721
e-mail: kit_bond@bond.senate.gov
Sen Jesse Helms (N. Carolina)
(202) 224-6342
(202) 228-1339(FAX)
jesse_helms@helms.senate.gov
Sen Richard Bryan
(202) 224-6244
senator@bryan.senate.gov
Sen Michael DeWine
(202) 224-2315
http://www.senate.gov/~dewine/forms1.html
Sen Strom Thurmond
202) 224-5972
senator@thurmond.senate.gov
Sen Gordon Smith
202) 224-3753
http://www.senate.gov/~gsmith/webform.html
Sen Harry Reid
202) 224-3542
senator_reid@reid.senate.gov
Sen Herb Kohl
(202) 224-5653
senator_kohl@kohl.senate.gov
THEY WANT TO CLAIM THEY'RE FIGHTING DRUGS
The temptation for any politician to back this bill is tremendous. By
censoring drug-related content on the Internet, they can claim to be
"fighting drugs" -- always a fruitful campaign slogan. Of course, it's
always easy to fight crime by taking away freedom. It's called a Police
State. That's no challenge at all. A true leader will figure out how to
fight crime while conserving freedom.
SAMPLE LETTER
If you're wondering what to write to your Senator, here's a sample letter,
courtesy of Y2K Newswire (but it's always better to use your own words --
don't be like the electric utilities copying NERC template documents...):
Dear Senator X,
I am seriously concerned about the potential impact of the proposed
Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act which, I understand, you are backing.
This bill would not only criminalize every major search engine company on
the Internet (such as Yahoo) and literally millions of independent web page
operators, it would also set a dangerous precedent. To begin banning on-line
discussions that are not "approved" smacks of Communism and clearly
infringes on the First Amendment. What's next: thought crimes?
I urge you to withdraw your support for this bill or any bill that denies
the American people their God (or Goddess. my note) -given freedom to
discuss
any topic they want.
>>
Having read the bill (and it's confusing leagaleese), I come to this
conclusion:
The bill title attacks one type of drug. The content allows it to attack all
"controlled substances" and "anapporved drugs".
However, I don't talk Legal-Speak. If somone can come up with a clear
translation, that isn't biased, please do so. (unless the above article is
accurate).
Why am I not surprised that Strom Thurmond is backing this?
Suzanne
Theme Parties in Box, delivered to your door!
How much easier can it get?
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
ONElist: your connection to like-minds and kindred spirits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May Our Lady And Our Lord Lead Us As We Move Toward The Millenium.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:15:47 EDT