Humanity's Greatest Secret: Dreams of the Universe

Published on Jul 7, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel
http://youtu.be/9jJYQJY80TI


FAIR USE STATEMENT: This Video may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making this material available in an effort to advance understanding of , political, religion, human rights, economic, and social justice issues, etc

Copyright Disclaimer [Rubaiat`s Blog]:
The use of incidental copyrighted material is covered under 'Fair Use' (Copyright Act, 1976) Title 17 U.S.C Section 107, with particular emphasis on such use for educational and non-profit purposes. Under Sec. 107 of the Copyright Act (1976), allowance is made for 'Fair Use' for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. This video and/or material may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this video and/or information is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.Fair Use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of Fair Use (Moe, AllSeeingEye). If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'Fair Use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Digital Millennium Copyright Act-
In Aug 2008, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, California, ruled that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material.
[View the blog`s full Fair Use Copyright Disclaimer at the end of the homepage] 

How The Illuminati Controls The Music Industry (MUST WATCH)

Infowars.com
Wednesday, June 27, 2012


Published on Jun 27, 2012 by PrisonPlanetLive
http://youtu.be/JcS8YhtFKRI

Pop Culture Cannibalism: How the Illuminati is using the music industry to poison the minds of a generation of young people. Symbolism, satanism and seduction - why the entertainment-industrial complex is one of the biggest threats we face. Paul Joseph Watson talks to singer/songwriter Teressa Wilcox, whose songs have hit the top 40 in several countries, about all this and more.

Resources mentioned during the interview are below.

Popular Music Is The Babylon System - http://www.infowars.com/popular-music-is-the-babylon-system/

WeSeeYouNWO - Masonic / Illuminati Imagery EXPOSED - 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ccCRn8Q2io

Lady Gaga and the New World Order - 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/jul/01/lady-gaga-vigilant-citizen-illuminati

Vigilant Citizen - Symbolism in Music - 
http://vigilantcitizen.com/category/musicbusiness/

Rihanna "Princess of the Illuminati - SLUT" - Appears at 38 seconds into "S&M" video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdS6HFQ_LUc

Lauryn Hill's Tumblr Letter on the Music Business
http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/lauryn-hills-tumblr-letter-on-the-music-business/

Check out Teressa's music - http://www.teressawilcox.net/

http://www.facebook.com/teressa.wilcox


FAIR USE STATEMENT: This Video may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making this material available in an effort to advance understanding of , political, religion, human rights, economic, and social justice issues, etc

Copyright Disclaimer [Rubaiat`s Blog]:
The use of incidental copyrighted material is covered under 'Fair Use' (Copyright Act, 1976) Title 17 U.S.C Section 107, with particular emphasis on such use for educational and non-profit purposes. Under Sec. 107 of the Copyright Act (1976), allowance is made for 'Fair Use' for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. This video and/or material may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this video and/or information is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.Fair Use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of Fair Use (Moe, AllSeeingEye). If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'Fair Use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Digital Millennium Copyright Act-
In Aug 2008, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, California, ruled that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material.
[View the blog`s full Fair Use Copyright Disclaimer at the end of the homepage] 

President Obama usurping his power?

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
April 6, 2012

President Obama, photo credit: inquisitr

[...]

Only a few days earlier, many a constitutional scholar were left with their jaws dropped down near their ankles, following Obama’s White House lawn speech, where he dismissed the US Supreme Court, as an “Unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constitutional and passed law”, referring to their ability to overturn Obamacare legislation as unconstitutional.

Such a statement could be viewed as disturbing to 21st century America, considering the record amount of unlawfull executive orders and signing statements which have taken place under both GW Bush and Obama over the last 12 years...


Read: Rise of the Petty Dictator

Will the new 'Obama flag' replace the official U.S. stars and striped flag?

New Version of American Flag Bearing the Face of President Obama Hangs in New Jersey

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
April 6, 2012

A CBS News affiliate in Philadelphia reported on an incident this week, where a local South Jersey resident has been flying the stars and stripes – only there are no the stars representing the 50 states. In their place was the emblazoned image of Barack Obama.

Official U.S. and Obama flag flown in Democratic Party 

HQ in Lake County, Florida; 

photo credit:EndoftheAmericanDrem

Residents complained that this new ’Obama Stripes’ version of the American Flag violates the United States official flag code.

One elderly resident appeared to be visibly shaken for fear she would be branded as a ‘racist’ for showing her disapproval of the Obama Stripes. She explains, “I don’t want to be called a racist because I object to an American flag where the stars are removed – to put a face. I don’t care if it’s a can of peas, it doesn’t belong on my American Flag.”



This has come a month after a similar event took place in Florida, where the Obama Stripes were seen hanging outside of the Lake County Democrat Party office. This apparently sent one Korean war veteran, Don Van Beck’s blood boiling.

WFTV Channel 9 interviewed Van Beck who explained, “I can’t describe how upset I was because you just don’t do that to the American flag,” Van Beck said.

Marine Corps vet John Masterjohn was seeing red, stating, “Joseph Stalin, pictures of Mao, pictures of Adolph Hitler. The pomp, the ceremony – the flags like that”.

Indeed, Masterjohn has a valid point. The soviet-style agitprop art which was the hallmark of Obama’s 2008 election craze, and undoubtedly helped to propell him into a ‘cult of personality’ – seemed to die off in the last and a half. But as the election year rolls forward in 2012, these two incidents may only be scratching the surface of what American can expect in terms of Obama’s iconic-agitprop imagery over the next 8 months.

History shows however, that whenever societies are lured into a cult of personality-led government, a rapid slide into tryanny almost always ensues...

(click here to read the full article) - A MUST READ

Related:

• Who Decided That It Was Okay To Replace The Stars On The American Flag With The Face Of Barack Obama?

• Obama becomes the first U.S. President to hold press conference without any American Flags present

• FOX News Suggests Banning the American Flag

Al Jazeera hypocrisy: Provided Syrian rebels with satellite phones, confirms Al Jazeera in bed with the globalists

Ex-employee: Al Jazeera provided Syrian rebels with satphones
RT News
Published: 04 April, 2012, 23:38


Demonstrators holding Kurdish and Syrian opposition flags gather during a protest against Syria's President Assad in Qamishli (REUTERS/Shaam News Network/Handout)

Al Jazeera has supplied Syrian rebels with satellite communication tools to ensure telephone and Internet connection, claims Ali Hashim, a former correspondent of the Qatar-funded channel. The equipment was smuggled from Lebanon, he told RT.

The channel paid $50,000 for smuggling phones and other tools across the Syrian border to ensure they would get an inside picture, claims Ali Hashim.

A month ago, Hashim and two other correspondents working for Al Jazeera in Lebanon, stepped down from their jobs over a dispute over how the Arab Spring should be covered. Reporting popular unrest in Bahrain and Syria revealed the acutest differences between the men and their employer.

“The channel was taking a certain stance. It was meddling with each and every detail of reports on the Syrian revolution. At the same time it was almost covering up what was going on in Bahrain,” recalls Hashim.

The journalist says Qatar authorities actually decided the channel’s agenda and created their own version of the Syrian crisis.

“We went to the border between Lebanon and Syria. There it became obvious that militants entered Syria from Lebanon to clash with the Syrian regular army, which was 3 kilometers away from the border,” Hashim told RT.

“We took photos of those people, but the channel declined them. I was asked to forget about the militants and to return to Beirut,” he says.

In an earlier interview with the Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, Hashim called Al Jazeera’s policy “informational suicide.”

The Syrian government has repeatedly slammed the unbalanced coverage of the uprising by some Arab news channels. But Hashim remarks that both sides of this conflict are playing dirty: while some media are siding with the rebels, omitting reports of the militants’ atrocities against civilians, the Syrian regime’s media behave as if there were no calls for freedoms and reforms in the country.

Syria has been engulfed by a popular uprising against President Bashar Al-Assad for over a year now. Opposition forces submit daily claims of people killed in fights with regular forces. The reports are hard to verify as the state remains closed to most foreign journalists. Nonetheless, the UN estimates over 9,000 people have died in the conflict. The Syrian authorities maintain they are fighting foreign insurgency, which has taken lives of over 2,000 troops.

UN 'observers' arrive in Syria for 'supervising mission' AKA regime change & occupation forces

United Nations team arrives in Syria for new ‘supervising’ mission
Al Arabiya
Thursday, 05 April 2012

Major-General Mood (R) will head the planning team that has arrived in Damascus to discuss the modalities of the eventual deployment of a U.N. supervision and monitoring mission. (Reuters)

A United Nations team dispatched by U.N.-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan arrived in Damascus on Thursday in a bid to lay out plans for the eventual deployment of observers in the crisis-wrecked country.

The team headed by Norwegian general Robert Mood, a Middle East specialist, plan to meet Syrian authorities to discuss “the modalities of the eventual deployment of the U.N. supervising mission,” Annan’s spokesman Ahmad Fawzi said.

Annan had told the Security Council on Monday that it should consider whether to send a mission to monitor events in Syria, where activists say more than 10,000 people have been killed in a brutal crackdown against protesters since March 2011...

(click here to read the full article)

Directly from the head NTC rat`s mouth: 'Too many people wanted Gaddafi dead, so goes the secrets with him'

Too many powers wanted Gaddafi dead - NTC head
RT News
Published: 26 March, 2012, 12:45

This still image taken from amateur video posted online by GlobalPost and obtained by Reuters, October 21, 2011, shows former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi after his capture by NTC fighters in Sirte (Reuters / GlobalPost via Reuters TV / Handout)

Colonel Muammar Gaddafi was wanted dead so his secrets would die with him. So insists Mahmoud Jibril, the man who led the NTC uprising to overthrow Colonel Gaddafi’s regime, in an exclusive interview with RT.

“Too many parties who have real interests that Gaddafi doesn’t talk, that he should be silenced forever,” Mahmoud Jibril told RT, specifying he does not know who exactly killed the Colonel – a foreign entity or Libyans.

“I would love to know who was behind [Colonel Gaddafi’s] killing,” he said.

Jibril told RT the former ruler of Libya Colonel Muammar Gaddafi sent too many contradictory messages, trying to buy time and pretending to have a readiness to share power.

Mahmoud Jibril said he regretted Colonel Gaddafi was not taken alive to face trial, but certain powers that may have wanted him to keep silence due to the secrets he knew.

After months of fierce resistance to NTC militia backed by allied NATO forces, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi was captured on October 21, 2011, in his hometown and stronghold of Sirte while trying to escape from encirclement. He was captured alive, but instead of being treated as prisoner of war, interrogated and put on trial, the former ruler of Libya was tortured for several hours and then murdered by a militia mob.

Later, the NTC claimed they never gave an order to kill Colonel Gaddafi. They even stated that at first the former Libyan leader was fatally wounded when a gunfight between his supporters and NTC fighters broke out after his capture.

North America set to be the next Middle East...will that set the stage for future interventions with oil consumers as the U.S. currently now does against Persian gulf nations?

North America has the potential to be energy world's next Middle East, report argues

North America's energy sector has the potential to drive a "remarkable resurgence" that could see the Continent become the new Middle East in shaping the global supply of gas and oil, a new report has claimed.

The Telegraph
By Richard Blackden
Mar 22, 2012; 4:29PM GMT

A natural gas drilling rig in the Antrim Shale field of northern Michigan. Photo: ALAMY 

 Deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, tapping shale deposits for gas and oil and Canada's oil sands are among the ingredients that could see North America's production of oil and natural gas liquids almost double to 26.6m barrels a day by 2020, according to a report by analysts at Citigroup.

"The energy sector in the next few decades could drive an extraordinary and timely revitalisation and reindustralisation of the US economy," the 80-page report said.
The vexed question of America's future energy needs and how to meet them has dominated the battle for The White House in recent weeks, as the Republican challengers blame President Barack Obama for the recent rise in petrol prices.

Experts say the subject is also gaining political traction among both Republicans and Democrats because the US is at an important crossroads on its future energy policy. 2011 was the first year since 1949 that the country exported more petroleum products than it imported.
Some of that was down to new supply, but declining domestic demand also played a role. US oil demand fell to 18.8m barrels a day last year, down almost 10pc from 2005, according to the Energy Department. The report predicts that the declining US demand for petroleum products, driven largely by the downturn, will continue as fuel efficient technologies are more widely adopted.

That, too, could contribute to making North America the pivotal player in shaping global supply. "The growing Continental surplus of hydrocarbons points to North America effectively becoming the new Middle East by the next decade," the report argues.

Its authors stress that the scenario it paints is one that could happen, rather than one that will. But they add that a reshaping of the America's position in the energy chain would have wider economic benefits, with up to 3.6m new jobs created.

The question of America's energy policy is not an exclusively economic one, with concerns over the environment and the wider role of government featuring heavily in the debate in the US.

"With political gridlock in Washington precariously high, it remains unlikely that a comprehensive energy policy will be achieved in the near future," the report says.

Pro-Assad, pro-regime rally in Syria...but you`ll never see on mainstream news

Pro-Assad rally in Damascus decries ‘one-year conspiracy’ (VIDEO)
RT News
Published: 15 March, 2012, 16:26
Edited: 15 March, 2012, 21:54

Pro-Assad rally in Damascus. A still shot from AP video.

Thousands have taken to the streets of the Syrian capital Damascus to support the country’s embattled leader Bashar al-Assad. The demonstration comes on the year anniversary of the anti-Assad uprising that has left scores dead and injured.

The pro-Assad rally is taking place under the slogan of protesting a ‘one-year conspiracy’ to overthrow the regime. The opposition said that Assad has forced people to attend the Damascus demonstration in order to overshadow the opposition rallies marking the beginning of the popular uprising in Syria a year ago, AP reports.

Video footage, however, shows people of different ages, including children, dancing and waving Syrian flags. Others had the national flag painted on their faces.
With opposition rallies planned all over Syria and abroad, local activists report the increased presence of the Syrian army in opposition strongholds.

The Popular uprising in Syria against the current regime started in mid-March last year. According to the UN, 7,500 people have been killed in the conflict.

While western states urge President Assad to leave his post, he claims the foreign-directed opposition is filled with terrorists and gangsters seeking to destroy Syria.

Political analyst Christoph Horstel, who was at the rally in Damascus, told RT that those who are still choosing violence over dialogue aren’t really interested in a Syrian democracy.

“It is very clear that anybody who is now picking up arms against this government, which obviously has indulged in honest reform and election, these people are not serious about constructive internal dialogue in Syria, that is quite clear. They are not part of a process, they are just killers”, Horstel said.

'Opposition losing supporters'

There are many circumstances serving to increase Assad’s popularity while weakening the opposition, says Middle East expert Ali Rizk. He believes there is no choice for Assad's international opponents but to resort to some kind of political solution to the crisis.

“Because of the procedures, because of the practices which some of the opposition resorted to, they have lost a lot of their supporters,” Rizk said. “When you see Syrian opposition figures speaking about for example cutting off ties, or decreasing their ties with Iran, cutting Syria off what we refer to as ‘a resistance axis,’ I think all that does, it gives more popularity to the Syrian regime.”

“The Syrian people are known to be people who very much support the anti-Israeli approach, a political stance which Assad has used,” he added. “And I think that is the main source of his popularity.”

Assad still has enough support not only in Damascus but in the rest of the country as well, and that will allow him to stay in power, at least for some time, political analyst Ahmed Badawi told RT.

“Assad seems to still have considerable support everywhere, except of course in the places that have come under heavy fire from his military,” he said. “The whole legitimacy question of course is a big dilemma for the regime, but it seems so far that the regime has managed to keep a lot of its legitimacy intact.”

What is the point of staying in Afghanistan?..."the powerful military industrial complex has got us by the throat!"

Cafferty: Thanks to Military Industrial Complex, We’re Still in Afghanistan
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 14, 2012

CNN’s Jack Cafferty is right. It is the military industrial complex and its hip pocket politicians that are responsible for dragging out the war in Afghanistan. He says it is time to bring the troops home.

It’s refreshing to see this sort of commentary from CNN despite the fact it pushed government propaganda for the invasion in the first place and is now paving the way with all sorts of absurd government and neocon propaganda for an attack on Iran and Syria.

It’s called playing both side of the fence.

"The Military Industrial Complex Has Got Us By The Throat!" Jack Cafferty


Uploaded by MOXNEWSd0tCOM on Mar 13, 2012
http://youtu.be/L78c8sLQqG4

March 13, 2012 CNN
http://MOXNews.com

Learn how the CIA operates: global domination (MUST WATCH)

How CIA Kills Countries


From: TRUTHBOXNEWS | Feb 24, 2012
http://youtu.be/4SA0_nwifGI

John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman, describes how the United States of America, through corporations and the CIA, wages economic wars against Third World countries in order to control their resources. Where economics fail, the CIA will come in creating dissent to overthrow a non-compliant government. Where that fails, assassination is employed. Only after all these options have failed will the U.S. military become involved.

Visit: http://whatreallyhappened.com/

[Video property and courtesy of TruthBoxNews`s Channel, please give proper credit and citation] 

Copyright Disclaimer [Rubaiat`s Blog]:

The use of incidental copyrighted material is covered under 'Fair Use' (Copyright Act, 1976) Title 17 U.S.C Section 107, with particular emphasis on such use for educational and non-profit purposes. Under Sec. 107 of the Copyright Act (1976), allowance is made for 'Fair Use' for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair Use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of Fair Use (Moe, AllSeeingEye). If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'Fair Use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act-

In Aug 2008, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, California, ruled that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material.
[View the blog`s full Fair Use Copyright Disclaimer at the end of the homepage]

Wondered why Somalia`s name has come up so much recently in the news? Because of OIL!

Hmmm...after the global powers massively over-fished Somalia`s fish population and dumped metric tons of toxic pollutants into their coastal waters to ultimately forcing them to piracy - the globalists now seek to suck dry and exploit their last natural resource of black gold.


Britain eyeing share in Somalia's future energy industry
Press TV
Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:48PM GMT

British Prime Minister David Cameron (center) opens the Somalia 

Conference at Lancaster House in London on 02/23/12. Credit: PressTV

British media say the government’s move to offer humanitarian aid and security assistance to Somalia is aimed at winning a stake in country's future energy industry.

In a report published Saturday, The Guardian revealed Britain’s involvement in a secret high-stakes dash for oil in Somalia.

Somalia, a former British colony, has been suffering decades of conflict and is known as a hotbed of piracy plaguing international shipping in the Indian Ocean.

In early February, British Foreign Secretary William Hague paid an unannounced visit to Somalia to become the first British Foreign Secretary to visit Mogadishu in almost two decades.

He also appointed Matt Baugh as Britain's first ambassador to war-torn Somalia, which he described the country as "the world's most failed state."

Last week, UK Prime Minister David Cameron hosted an international conference on Somalia where he pledged more aid, financial help and measures to fight terrorism in the African nation.

The Guardian report, however, described the summit as talks between British officials and Somali counterparts over exploiting intact oil reserves in the arid northeastern part of Somalia.

"We have spoken to a number of UK officials, some have offered to help us with the future management of oil revenues. They will help us build our capacity to maximize future earnings from the oil industry," the report cited Abdulkadir Abdi Hashi, the minister for international cooperation in the autonomous Puntland region, as saying.

Puntland is an region in northeastern Somalia, where the first oil is expected to be extracted next month.

Experts say London’s involvement in the future Somali oil industry could prop up the UK’s weakened economy, at a time it has resorted to austerity measures to avoid a budget deficit.

Somali Prime Minister Abdiweli Mohamed Ali said his government had almost no other choice but to persuade Western companies to invest and operate in Somalia by offering a portion of the country's plentiful resources of oil and gas and large reserves of uranium.

Britain's efforts to develop Somalia's natural resources continue while the Canadian company Africa Oil started oil exploration in Puntland in January, the first drilling in Somalia for 21 years.

Chinese and US firms have reportedly also voiced interest about the potential for oil as the country sounds safe enough to drill after two decades of unrelenting war.

MRS/JR/IS

Additional Readings:
Somalia promises west oil riches as diplomats vow to defeat al-Shabaab
3 die in Mogadishu stadium bombing
Scores killed in US drone attack in Somalia
Heavy clashes claim 25 lives in south Somalia

Outlawing protests? Just what is our Congress DOING in Washington?

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal
RT News
Published: 29 February, 2012, 02:13

Washington: US Park police detains a Christian religious activist during

a pro-life demonstration in front of the White House in Washngton

on  Feb. 16, 2012 (AFP photo/Jewel Samad).

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance."

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.

Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal.”

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.

Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.