Cyberbullying Assignment
The Latest Cyberbullying Assignment is Not There to Enhance Internet Safety but Rather to Further the Agenda of the New World Order Elite Through More Repression.
More than a month back, the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act was set up.
This occured after a teenage girl committed suicide when the mother of a former friend attacked her psychologically.
The mother used repeated hurting comments on a popular social networking website, MySpace.com.
Representative Sanchez introduced the bill a year ago and it has repeatedly been given to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration to be enacted upon.
Many political analysts believe the bill could attract political quarrels due to its broad definitions.
As quoted from clause Sec 881(a),
“Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behaviour, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”
Even a layman can tell that these terms are too vague and could be easily manipulated for selfish agendas and self-centered schemes.
When a blogger unbeknownst to the world posts damaging comments one after another of Steve Jobs, and publishes his pictures, that should immediately qualify as a case of a cyberbullying assignment, in theory.
The thousands of pundits of Meghan McCain who, as people of great responsibility, decided to focus unflatteringly on her material appearance, should be prosecuted for creating “substantial emotional stress”.
Thus in totality, all the bloggers in the world should join hands and worry they may be sued anytime under the new Act.
The exact truth is that Congress does not even need to worry itself with this cyberbullying assignment in the very first place.
The central case of Megan Meier is without a doubt a sad story, and the woman who caused her harm in exacting those hurtful comments should be put on a wall and be hurled with stones.
However, on the other side of the coin, we are also not about to be faced with a disaster of continuous cyberbullying assignments relating to sudden deaths, and we can apply existing laws that relate to similar cases such as libel, slander and fraud.
Also, Ms Meier had been known to be prescribed psychotropic drugs because she had been emotionally fragile.
Putting it all together, her case was an extremely rare one, and cannot be used as the basis of a new law in the United States.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unX3HYj-5GI&feature=emb_logoThe Act Isn’t for You
The Act in question was never created to protect children. It enhances the plan of weakening the power of the First Amendment and speaking in lies to Democrats and their supposed “progressives” in creating legal support for their unopposed tyranny.
The Obama administration’s move to crowd the FCC with “diverse” protestors has nothing to do with making sure minorities have rights in speaking out in the local media which is overseen by giant corporations who have a greater interest in profits than the real spread of diversity.
The First Amendment Our Defence
When confronted by seemingly unending doubts, the Congress should always refer to the First Amendment for guidance.
It prevents the Congress from setting up laws that directly or indirectly limit the right of free speech for all Americans.
Therefore, the recent cyberbullying assignment is not, and should not, be excluded.
An important note is that the Constitution has no say on relating rights to be free from so called “distress,” neither does it allow the US government to act as a deciding judge on what is allowed to mean “substantial emotional distress” or “hostile behavior” that does not break the law on issues such as battery, trespass and assault.
We do not need the State government to behave like a parent and treat us like a bunch of children, and if we allow them to do so in overpowering us, we should be prepared for those people who are in great positions of power abuse their right against those who threaten them.
No Protection From Cyberbullies Yet
The new bill is unconstitutional, and in effect, with the laws currently in practice, the term “criminal harassment” is not as well-defined in comparison to “sexual harassment.”
Definitions of the terms may change slightly from state to state, but it generally means communication which is threatening and persistent.
Thus, there is really no anti-mind-game harassment law out there in the country that protects a person specifically from a case cyberbullying assignment.
It is all a ploy to give the people behind the government more power over us.
My First Amazing Ayahuasca Experience 
Pine Needle Tea 
The REAL Controllers of Humanity: The Papal Bloodlines 
Is it Global Warming or Cooling? 
Gun Rights and Obama Examined