One of the most potentially repressive bills ever to be considered by Congress passed the House of Representatives last month by a vote of 404 to 6, with 22 not voting. H.R. 1955, called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, was introduced by California Democrat Jane Harmon with 14 co-sponsors. Designed, supposedly "To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes," the language in this bill is so broad that it easily could incorporate the Orwellian concept of Thought Crimes.
TRASHING THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Supporters say that the measure will help government and law enforcement officials to understand and prevent domestic terrorism; but critics are concerned that it is a thinly disguised attempt to criminalize dissent. The bill's vague and open-ended language could be used by the government to inhibit or prevent free speech and assembly, including legitimate dissent. Given the Government's predisposition to read our emails and listen to our telephone calls, Big Brother's ability to extend its presumption of guilt and detain ordinary, law-abiding citizens no longer is restricted to those pages between the cover of 1984.
As written, this legislation defines "violent radicalization" as "the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change." However, the bill does not define either what constitutes "an extremist belief system" or "facilitating ideologically based violence." As a lifelong Democrat and Connecticut citizen who, in the past, voted for Joe Lieberman (I regret to say) and has since been referred to by this neo-con patsy as a "crazy jihadist" for opposing the Iraq War and supporting Ned Lamont last year -- it is very troubling to think that people of his ilk may be deciding whose belief systems are extremist in nature . . .
That this bill passed the House by such a large margin, and almost without notice, is particularly troubling. This is not (and should not be) a political issue; it is a Constitutional one! Free speech and the freedom to assemble are the concerns of liberals and conservatives alike. Many of us are familiar with the continuing advocacy for the Rule of Law by Bruce Fein, a Constitutional lawyer who served in the Reagan Administration. He contends that the unlawful practices of this Administration warrant Impeachment, while Nancy Pelosi chose to take this issue off the table from Day 1.
Now we have a Democrat who -- with the complicity of most other House members -- has provided an Administration-gone-wild with yet another tool in its efforts to dismantle the Rule of Law. In one of the most ironic turns of this very sad and disturbing story, I encountered a brief ray of light from a most unlikely source.
STRANGE BUT WELCOME BEDFELLOWS
I lived in California and then attended the University of California between 1958 and 1963. In those days, The John Birch Society represented the epitome of arch-conservative advocacy. So imagine my surprise to have come across the following; in fact, I practically fell off my chair!
In its section on key findings related to homegrown terrorism, the measure gives lip-service to constitutional rights, but also singles out the Internet and its open market for the flow of ideas and information as part of the problem. According to the measure, "The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens."
The unspoken threat implied by that passage is that the government might have to clamp down on free speech online. "At base," wrote retired Col. Dan Smith in Counterpunch, "Harman's proposal seems to be a direct attack on First Amendment rights."
http://www.capwiz.com/...
If there is anything in this story that generates hope, it is that some people who hold widely disparate views nevertheless care mightily about our Constitutional system, especially the Bill of Rights which the Bush-Cheney regime seems intent upon trashing, albeit with the collusion of far too many members of Congress.
TAKE ACTION
Only the Senate stands between passage and total capitulation to the whims of an Administration that has demonstrated, time and again, that laws are to be broken and perverted at will. Our job is to do everything we can to stop this measure from becoming law.
PLEASE CALL YOUR SENATORS TODAY; ASK YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS TO DO THE SAME; CALL REGULARLY AND OFTEN. IF WE FAIL, IT ALL MIGHT BE OVER. . . DAILY KOS AND THOSE OF US WHO POST HERE COULD BE EARLY TARGETS!