"A world newspaper of conscience" alongside Le Monde Diplomatique and the U.K. Guardian. — Danny Schechter
Kucinich on HR 1955
December 2, 2007 | Posted in IndyBlog | Email this articleSubscribe or Donate to the Indypendent
By Jessica Lee, The Indypendent
Democratic presidential hopeful Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) said that he believes the proposed Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act (H.R. 1955/S. 1959) is unconstitutional.
Speaking to a crowd of supporters in New York City Nov. 29, Kucinich took several questions from the audience, including my question on why he voted against the bill. Kucinich was one of only six representatives to oppose the bill, which passed the House 404-6 on Oct. 23.
“If you understand what his bill does, it really sets the stage for further criminalization of protest,” Kucinich said. “This is the way our democracy little, by little, by little, is being stripped away from us. This bill, I believe, is a clear violation of the first amendment.”
Kucinich referred to the bill as the “thought crime bill,” when he explained in a joking fashion that, “We have freedom of speech. Thoughts, sometimes, proceed speech. There is usually a unity in thought, word and deed.”
The bill would create a National Commission, who would be charged with the task making legislative recommendations on how to prevent, disrupt and mitigate violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. Many activists, scholars and civil liberties experts are worried that in order to prevent an act of “homegrown terrorism,” people who have radical or “extreme belief systems” would have to be monitored before a criminal act might occur. This, they surmise, would amount to unlawful surveillance of individuals who are critical to the Bush administration and those who hold power in the current economic and political system.
He pointed to the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) of 2006 as an example of another bill that, he says, also “criminalizes dissent.” According to the bill, anyone who engages in acts of “force, violence, or threats” that would interfere or cause damage to businesses engaged in animal enterprise, could be charged with a felony. This includes acts that could cause a “loss of profits” to the business. The businesses noted in the bill include, “a commercial or academic enterprise that uses or sells animals or animal products for profit, food or fiber production, agriculture, education, research, or testing; a zoo, aquarium, animal shelter, pet store, breeder, furrier, circus, or rodeo, or other lawful competitive animal event; or any fair or similar event intended to advance agricultural arts and sciences.”
Interestingly, like H.R. 1955, the AETA was also passed under the “suspension of the rules,” a provision that allows the House to quickly pass non-controversial bills. When the suspension was requested Nov. 16, 2006, only six members of the house were present for the vote. Kucinich was the only one to oppose the bill. He noted that the bill was, “written in such a way as to have a chilling effect on the exercise of the constitutional rights of protest…”
Kucinich promised a follow-up interview with The Indypendent. Stay tuned!
–
Read my original article on HR 1955, “Bringing the War on Terrorism Home: Congress Considers How to ‘Disrupt’ Radical Movements in the United States.”
Introduction:
Under the guise of a bill that calls for the study of “homegrown terrorism,” Congress is apparently trying to broaden the definition of terrorism to encompass both First Amendment political activity and traditional forms of protest such as nonviolent civil disobedience, according to civil liberties advocates, scholars and historians.
Read Entire Article: http://www.indypendent.org/2007/11/19/homegrown-terrorism/
Blog Update on Opposition to the Bill and how the Legislation would Target the Internet: http://www.indypendent.org/2007/11/27/homegrown-terrorism-update/
Democracy Now! on HR 1955, November 20, 2007:
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/20/homegrown_terrorism_prevention_act_raises_fears
53 Responses to “Kucinich on HR 1955”
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:43 pm
it is good to hear that there are a few good, trusted leaders in the Congress today. With only 5 other people voting with him, there is an aparant void in the importance of individual liberties represented by our congressman and congresswomen. this must be a movement of the people if it is to be succeesfful.I support Rep Kucinich and think he is one of a few leaders who look out for the rights of individuals in this nation.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I AM ASTOUNDED AND APPALLED. WE ARE LIVING THE COMMUNIST WITCH HUNTS OF THE 50′S UNDER THE GUISE OF TERRORISM. WHAT CAN WE DO AS INDIVIDUALS TO STOP THIS ONSLAUGHT ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT!
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:58 pm
[b[WHAT CAN WE DO AS INDIVIDUALS TO STOP THIS ONSLAUGHT ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT![/b]
1. Contact your congressional delegation.
2. Vote for Ron Paul.
3. Send a donation to the ACLU.
4. Write a letter to the editor of your hometown newspaper advising others to do 1 -3.
5. Don’t vote for morons who are funded by the corporatocracy.
That’s just off the top of my head, of course…..
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:17 pm
MG - I don’t object to Ron Paul in the least, but you forgot - VOTE KUCINICH :)
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:43 pm
I’m not sure they’re onto something here. Read the bill, it reads like the creation of a bipartisan commission to do an 18th month research/report on how to prevent violent religious fundamentalism from infecting our country.
But dont let me tell you, just read the thing - it’s not very long even. Google “H.R. 1955″.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:51 pm
MG manages to utterly miss the point. Ron Paul FAILED to stop this bill. Ron Paul FAILED to do anything to oppose it. Ron Paul FAILED to draw attention to it. That makes MG nothing more than another Ron Paul spambot.
Matt seems to support this bill, and pretends it will “prevent violent religious fundamentalism from infecting our country.”
Too late, Matt. Violent religious fundamentalists have already infected our country. One of them is president. And his American death toll is higher than Bin Laden’s.
December 3rd, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Dennis Kucinich will be the next president.
I have faith that majority of the American people will understand he is the one who will reinstate our civil liberties as well as lead our Country in a new direction away from corruption and lies in the white house.
December 3rd, 2007 at 6:47 pm
call me stupid, but I just read the full text of the bill and it seems to me that it’s establishing a research commmittee. i’m not saying that this isn’t a step in the wrong direction, but it looks to me that kucinich is participating in random acts of screaming and yelling, rather than pointing to something substantial. the fact that he was the only one who opposed this bill also rings alert bells in my head, as it further points to a grasping at proverbial straws in terms of what he’s actually done.
however, i may be wrong. anyone want to clear this up for me?
December 3rd, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Onesong, I’ve yet to totally complete reading the document (I’ll probably do so inbetween paragraphs as I write this), but I read this and was immediately drawn to the vagueness, and the ideas stressed:
“The term `violent radicalization’ means 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.” - The level of extremism is not well defined. It merely says that if you adopt or promote a belief deemed extremist, you are a violent radical. Even if you’re just a citizen promoting an alternate idea as to the way our government should progress.
Furthermore, it states “The term `homegrown terrorism’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” Force is a vague term. Hunger strikes, sit-ins, and mass mailings are such things that could be possibly construed as force. The very act of trying to coerce the government or it’s people is protest. By saying force OR violence, you’re making a clear distinction between the two, as opposed to true terrorism which is violence of a physical or chemical nature.
“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.” - That quote is in and of itself a very obvious opposition to Net Neutrality, and it states that websites such as this that may conclude that a bill of this nature is taking us down a road of fascism is clearly disallowing protest through the internet.
Just as the Federal Communication Commission is (in my opinion) a violent bastardization of free-speech rights, this proposed commission would likely and severely limit the ability to protest or speak out against the government in any facet. They may claim that they will protect civil liberties, but the extent to which they say that they will, does in no way protect our rights to speech and protest.
I for one am entirely opposed to this bill and living in a state where my Senators will most certainly vote for it.
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:11 pm
I have to agree with onesong. I just read the article and it has this section written in to protect civil rights with an auditing mechanism. It looks more like creating a thinktank or research group.
SEC. 899F. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.
`(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to prevent ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States citizens or lawful permanent residents.
`(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security’s commitment to racial neutrality.
`(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Security shall develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, and shall include the results of audits under such mechanism in its annual report to Congress required under section 705.’.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the items relating to title VIII the following:
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:18 pm
I’m a Republican, conservative in my politics, and I think Kucinich is a Marxist. But he is 110% correct about this legislation — it is an assault on our liberties, and it needs to be stopped. The bureaucracy of tyranny is growing right in front of us, waiting for the day when a “strong leader” will put it to use.
Take a look at this new program from DHS. It gives ICE officers expanded authority to question and even detain American citizens who are _leaving_ the U.S.! Even our basic freedom of travel is now subject to the whim of faceless bureaucrats who answer to no voters.
The head of the TSA recently said in an interview that his agents are going to expand their activities to include areas outside of the airport terminals. Can anyone say National Police Force?
Better wake up people, Kucinich, Paul, and a few others are all that stand between us and a police state.
December 3rd, 2007 at 9:02 pm
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
From the proposed bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:4:./temp/~c110EbSly8:e582:
“`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization’ means 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.”
Oops, arrest me now for promoting an extremist belief system by quoting the Declaration of Independence. As vaguely as the term “violent radicalization” is defined in the legislation, they would have had to arrest the founding fathers. I’ll have to agree with Jinno and Kucinich on this. Where have our sensibilities gone?
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:24 pm
re :
Ron Paul FAILED to stop this bill. Ron Paul FAILED to do anything to oppose it. Ron Paul FAILED to draw attention to it. That makes MG nothing more than another Ron Paul spambot.
Ron Paul is a SENATOR - this is a HOUSE bill - Ron Pal would not have seen this bill - yet.
Learn your Gov’t
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Those who note the bill has language about “protecting” civil liberties are missing the big picture. Legislation doesn’t have to say it protects civil liberties because — absent a new constitutional amendment — Congress can’t wily-nily violate our civil liberties. And it’s the courts that determine this, not Congress.
So inclusion of this language is legislatively, juridicially meaningless. So why insert all this language? Because this bill IS such a threat to basic freedoms and forms of protest that the authors of it wanted to say, “See, we’re protecting constitutional rights.”
And I really wonder why some people are arguing so feverently that the bill is not a threat. The U.S. government is the biggest threat to Americans (and the rest of the world), far exceeding the dangers of some medieval-thinking fanatics who got lucky on Sept. 11.
It was recently revealed that the NSA is copying the entire U.S. traffic of the Internet every single second, data-mining it and using AI programs to analyze the content. The government has declared U.S. citizens enemy combatants. It is holding environmental activists on terrorist charges because one brought a copy of the Anarchist Cookbook. The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act would make you a terrorist for calling for a boycott of Burger King.
This bill is just the latest step in the slew of repressive legislation passed in recent years (though it stretches back to the Clinton administration). Don’t believe these fools who say otherwise.
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:59 pm
The act does not create a think tank. It creates a commission charged with creating a national strategy for combating what the government supposedly thinks of as home-grown terrorism. It is the first step in creating, expanding, or consolidating federal agency actions. There will, no doubt be amendments dealing with domestic surveillance, detention, and interrogation to follow.
Here are some tidbits that struck me as “interesting” and “informative”.
The so called civil liberties protections of this act are to be audited internally by the Department of Homeland Security- sweet. I’ll really rest easy knowing that.
The commission is immune from the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which, among other things, requires the committee meetings to be open to the public, and restricts the actions of the committee to advisory only. HR1955 says it will “in General” try to have public meetings. From what I gathered in reading this Act, it also seems obvious that this committee will not be prevented from taking part in, or contracting, surveillance or other passive intelligence gathering.
This committee WILL focus a good deal of attention on ways to intercept, track, and possibly block information on the internet. Not just communications between American citizens, which I’m sure will be part of it (hello, anyone listen to the news lately?), but also information. Just information thought to potentially inspire or support thoughts and feelings (read the section about qualifications of members, i.e. anthropology, sociology, juvenile justice, etc) that MAY or COULD lead a person to eventually commit an act deemed terrorism.
Under the “qualifications” sub-heading, there is also this little doozy “…Islam and other world religions” which is striking so near the statement about terrorism coming from all religious and ethnic groups, and the committee not being focussed on specific groups. Yeah, sure…wink wink. Admittedly, Islam is basically standard text in any bill intended to further government surveillance and limit dissent, which is what this committee will obviously be focussed on doing.
I’m not some Kucinich fan-peep, but he DOES seem to be on to something. I’m glad he makes noise about it, and I’m glad he voted against it. Why is that “grasping” at straws? At least the guy was there. What, is he supposed to vote FOR it since it would pass anyways? Give me a break.
The fact that this and AETA were both passed through this strange suspension of rules mechanism should raise a little bit of alarm, if not nausea. Unfortunately, it strikes me as just one more little bit of awfulness in a sea of awfulness.
I’m disappointed that people are using this news as a place to spam about the candidate they prefer for president. Come on. As if Ron Paul or Kucinich will be president. As if that’s the point.
This bill represents something even the most credulous of us know is dangerous. The problem isn’t who will be elected president, it’s the fact that whom ever IS elected FROM NOW ON will wield basically unmitigated power, and all legal avenues for addressing it will be reduced to window dressing. And this bill is hardly the cornerstone of such a “change”.
Seems like a pretty good time for the congress to find a way to enhance their ability to manage a public that will increasingly sympathize with methods of dissent outside of those avenues.
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:36 pm
Fred sanford you are a liar. Ron Paul is a congressman not a senator. If you are going to lie at least try to be a little more convincing. Ron Paul voted AGAINST this bill. People like Fred sanford are why this country is going to hell.
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:51 pm
Re: to whoever said ron paul was a senator
Ron Paul is a member of the house of representatives in the 14th district of Texas, but he was absent for the vote.
December 4th, 2007 at 12:05 am
Mike - Check washingtonpost.com, Ron Paul was a non-vote on this bill. For whatever reason he voted neither for or against it.
December 4th, 2007 at 12:28 am
Mike, it sounds awfully dumb to say, “Ron Paul is a congressman, not a senator.”
Senators are Congressman. Congress consists of the house and the senate.
December 4th, 2007 at 1:09 am
We need this bill to fight radical islamists wake up people
December 4th, 2007 at 1:32 am
Matt Says:
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:43 pm
I’m not sure they’re onto something here. Read the bill, it reads like the creation of a bipartisan commission to do an 18th month research/report on how to prevent violent religious fundamentalism from infecting our country.
————————————————————-
That cow done left the barn already. –Bill
December 4th, 2007 at 4:04 am
FRED SANFORD MAKES THE USUAL REALITY ERRORS OF RON PAUL SUPPORTERS. (And brings disgrace to the great name of Fred.)
Fred Sanford “Ron Paul is a SENATOR - this is a HOUSE bill - Ron Pal would not have seen this bill - yet. Learn your Govât”
Fred Sanford FAILS: Ron Paul IS NOT A SENATOR. (And Ron Paul will never be president, either).
Further, BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE have seen the bill. Read the article.
Fred Sanford, like Bush and like most Ron Paul supporters, gets reality completely WRONG.
So Fred Sanford FAILS like Ron Paul, and my statement stands:
Ron Paul FAILED to stop this bill. Ron Paul FAILED to do anything to oppose it. Ron Paul FAILED to draw attention to it. That makes MG nothing more than another Ron Paul spambot.
And that makes Fred Sanford another clueless Ron Paul supporter who embarrasses himself with false accusations that show his ignorance.
December 4th, 2007 at 4:15 am
Nick says “Mike, it sounds awfully dumb to say, âRon Paul is a congressman, not a senator.â Senators are Congressman. Congress consists of the house and the senate.”
Mike, it sounds awfully dumb to say that. After all, Ron Paul’s own Website refers to “Congressman Paul”.
Or do you think that Ron Paul is awfully dumb, too?
December 4th, 2007 at 6:34 am
I cant believe there is even a debate about this. I cant believe that we are not marching on capital hill getting this bill out before we take yet another step towards a fascist state. Don’t believe me? Well thats probably because you only pay attention tot he mainstream media. Maybe this piece from the Huffington Post will change your mind, and please, actually read it before you come at me with “stupid hippie conspiracy theorist”.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/ten-steps-to-close-down-a_b_46695.html
Open your eyes and escape this convenient denial we are all to accustom to. Don’t blame yourself though, for being misinformed, but shame on you if you refuse to dig deeper, and refuse to look at the world around you. If you think that the government is just a-ok, then either you are uneducated in -real- world politics and current issues, or you are simply, once again, are in a pleasant denial that allows you to go on with your everyday life. But what will you do when there is another Bird-Flu “epidemic” and you are told either you receive a vaccination, or you go to jail. What will you do when even writing a post like this will get you thrown in jail, without the basic civil liberties of life that we pride ourselves on, and so readily scoff at other countries for not having. Well wake the F up, the time has come for individuals to either make a stand against, or for this government. Is a revolution in order? We shall see. But make no mistake, we are only a dirty bomb away from Bush declaring Marshal Law, dawning his military uniform, suspending elections, and continuing his “mission from God”. Don’t fear a man who is operated by greed, for they will eventually fail, but fear a man who really believes what he is doing is right. Please, please don’t let the luxury of comfort keep you from realizing the harsh truths about our government, and NEVER, EVER lay down your freedoms in exchange for temporary protection. The threat of radical Islam, is not, contrary to a previous post, an eminent threat. The greatest threat of this country is the Bush Administration drawing and quartering our constitution, and trying to scare and confuse us into giving up rights. As a member of an organized militia, believe me when I say that if there was a threat of radical Islam in this country, there are plenty of men and women who will to lay down their lifes to protect us, and Im not talking about the military. WE are the driving force behind this country from the economy to protecting ourselves. That is the principles this country was founded on. The question you have to ask yourself is whether you are willing to defend this country and our freedoms, when the oppressor is the -government-. I urge every one of you to take the call of arms from our founding fathers, and defend ourselves from the exact thing HR 1955 is trying to do, along with all the others bills conveniently pushed through the House and Senate without an outcry from the mainstream media, and by proxy the majority of the American Sheeple. Write your congressmen, spam public offices with faxes, emails, anything to get your point across. But dont go placidly through life believing that our government, ie the Bush administration and the powers that be, have your best interests in mind.
December 4th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
Clarification on Ron Paul:
Ron Paul is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. (R-Texas). To clarify, Paul was one of the 22 members of the House not present for the vote Oct. 23, thus he could not have voted against H.R. 1955. The bill passed the House 404-6.
However, the vote was cast under the “suspension of the rules,” a House procedure that is generally used to quickly pass non-controversial bills. Once a motion to “suspend the rules” is enacted, debate is limited to 40 minutes and a 2/3 majority is required to agree to the motion. Usually a suspension motion is phrased “to suspend the rules and pass the bill,” and if the motion is agreed to, then the bill is considered passed by the House.
The six representatives who vote against H.R. 1955 include:
-Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
-Neil Abercrombie (D-HI)
-Jerry Costello (D-IL)
-Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)
-Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
-John Duncan (R-TN)
To my knowledge, Rep. Paul has not issued any public statement on HR 1955. Although it is clear his supporters are widely critical of this bill, it is interesting that he has not issued a press release or statement about this bill.
December 4th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
Why don’t they call it by it’s old name… The House Unamerican Activities Committee. Joe McCarthy is smiling in his grave right now.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:08 am
Ron Paul is a flaming hypocrite. If he has no complaint about this bill he is no libertarian. He plays a libertarian on TV, but in reality he’s just another politician.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
according to this bill the american government is illigal
December 7th, 2007 at 2:52 am
This bill is scary… it’s all in the definitions…
http://internationalaurora.blogspot.com/2007/12/what-is-wrong-with-congress-part-ii.html
December 7th, 2007 at 4:27 am
Hello everyone. Let us not debate what this act is intended for. To determine the level of vague diction in the act, you need not look past this remark;
“AN ACT
To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes.”
I wonder what “other purposes” they could possibly be implying?
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110hnpMaN::
December 9th, 2007 at 2:45 am
Don’t be afraid of the “incompetent” government bureaucrats. The function will eventually be privatized and a company like Blackwater will be (over) paid with our tax dollars to regulate us and our thoughts. Don’t forget to mail in the forms to “opt-out” so they won’t share your personal data with their corporate affiliates for marketing purposes and extortion.
December 11th, 2007 at 4:51 am
Re: “To my knowledge, Rep. Paul has not issued any public statement on HR 1955. Although it is clear his supporters are widely critical of this bill, it is interesting that he has not issued a press release or statement about this bill.”
Google quickly found this for me…
‘Homegrown Terror’ Act An Attack On Internet Freedom?
By Rep. Ron Paul
December 11th, 2007 at 4:53 am
… I must add that this could be fabricated, or was just sloppily prepared because it does contain some inaccurate information concerning who tried to stop the bill right at the top of the page.
December 12th, 2007 at 10:17 pm
Fred,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul He is a Representative in the House of Representaives, not he senator!!!!
December 24th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
The John birch society website provides by means of a prepared letter for anyone to let the senators of their state that you ( the citizen at large ) do not want the bill passed in the senate.
Simply enter your name and address zip code and the letter is forwarded to them as wellas to senator Lieberman from Connecticut who heads the review committee on the bill. I have already done this and received a reply explaining in vague terminology how innocuos it is as to not infringe our rights to free speech or material for reading or viewing . I don`t believe a word of the explaination , i urged that it not be voted in, but i fear that it will be beacuse already our elected officials have it in mind to begin censoring our great society. Our collective voting rights will not endure for long after this . Time will come when the congress will pass laws to the degree that the people will not vote about who will serve in the senate and the house . This may seem absurd to most people but remember this fellow citizens there are many examples of historical
records where the ugly reality of censorship and loss of rights happened in other countries and do not be fooled by anything it can and will happen in this country if we remain delusional about it all. When the conngress looks to THE UNITED KINGDOM , CANADA, AUSTRALIA , FOR COMPARITIVE LAWS TO ENACT IN THIS COUNTRY , YOU MY FELLOW CITIZEN HAVE GOT TO ASK YOURSELF THIS QUESTION …. AM I GOVERNED BY AMERICANS OR FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS? I served in the US Army exiting honorably in 1975 and require no thanks from anyone about the time i served it was my choice to do it, it is not my choice to lose my rights , it is not my choice to be governed vicariously by laws of other countries as embraced by our elected officials ,it is not my choice to be labeled a homegrwon terrorist because i do not agree with our government all of the time .It is my choice to desire to have my governement accountable at all times including the fact that “not one incompetent member of any branch of governement failed to do its job before and during 911. all of the taxpayers moneys spent on intelligense excluding no entity availed us nothing . Now nearly seven years later instead of finding and crucifying BIN LADEN the best they can do is take away more rights from us.
Make your vote stand for something at the next representative and senatorial elections it is the only vote that really still counts at all , and i predict that in time that too will become a MEMORY
if we fail to let our officials that we want they to be accountable for their incompetence not us.
We the citizens did not fail to fight terrorism , they did, inspite the billions of tax dollars spent on it, it was they who lost not a single job as a result of their failures.Today they mean to infringe on us ever much more to hide their incompetence .
Be well fellow citizens and wish you all well this holiday season GOD BLESS THE OLD AMERICA THE ONE I TRULY LOVE , I hope all of you remember it too.
January 5th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
I know Elizabeth and her husband Dennis and your right, they need to be heard. We shot an in-depth interview with Elizabeth and she is amazing and so is Dennis. You can see the show online at gliving.com.
Here is a direct link to Elizabeth Kucinich talking about what they want to see happening in America.
http://gliving.tv/videos/room101-elizabethkucinich-p1-player.php
January 6th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
H.R. 1955 is a travesty. It actually supports clandestine subterranean lab facilities which utilize subliminal microwave weapons technology for purposes of mind control and brainwashing. Scientists operating from these secret facilities can abduct anyone they choose, fill their head with visions directed at Holographic Visual Implants surreptiously placed near the frontal cortex of the brain (as well as biochip micro implants in the neck for neuro-impulse stimulation) and then claim their terrorists when they rebel against That Hideous Strength. The most militant ideological evil the world has ever known needs bills/laws like H.R. 1955 to maintain it’s horrific oppression.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:45 am
If this Bill,HR 1955 passes the Senate, just remember that when that 3:00 AM knock on your door occurs and you did nothing to stop this grab for power, you deserve your trade off, of safety for freedom!
January 10th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
That is why Ron Paul thinks we should stick to the constitution in government, domestic & foreign policy. Give them the hand they take your whole family. I want my life back and the government off my back & out of my wallet. ronpaul2008(dot)com
January 10th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
By the way, Dennis loves Ron Paul and enjoys working alongside him in the fight for our country. He has verbally endorsed Dr Paul on videos I have viewed on You tube. Now Howard Stern has also.
January 11th, 2008 at 2:24 am
Yeah, I’m calling folks to wake them up to please give Dennis a chance to turn our country around.
January 20th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
First time to this website……does anyone know where Ron Paul was that he couldn’t cast a vote for HR 1955?
January 21st, 2008 at 11:42 am
Honest Abe speaks from the Grave
Hello my fellow Americans. Are you Americans or Ameri Can’ts? Let me kick this off with something I said over a hundred years ago. I’m not the first to point this out, and I’m certainly not the last, but I did say it, and I feel it needs to be repeated again.
Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object.
This is the ghost of Abe Lincoln here letting you modern American citizens know that I’ve rolled over in my grave so many times in the last 20 years that I look like a corkscrew. This latest attack on your freedoms should not be taken lightly. I look down at the country from up here in Heaven and see 600 plus FEMA camps with the housing capacity for nearly 10 plus million people already built, operational and staffed with rail systems leading in and out of them. My hommie Andrew Jackson committed post-Necro Suicide after realizing how enslaved you all have become due to the Federal Reserve taking over the US Dollar. All I can see coming out of this is a nightmare scenario of further enslavement, martial law, and these FEMA camps… well, you remember World War II don’t you? If you don’t, google image it and remind yourselves of what these FEMA camps resemble the most. Before anyone spouts off about my criticism of FEMA camps, go ahead and believe what you want, I don’t care what you think - but understand that they aren’t there for the next big hurricane or to help with the current prison overcrowding issues. I hope its not for an expansion on the already unconstitutional war on drugs, because as you all know, my feeling on any prohibition is the same as I stated it in my days as President:
A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.
And
Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes.
Those that think because of some racist remarks I made back in the day discredits me, I no longer foster those racist views. And for those of you whom don’t think I hate slavery, I do. I define slavery today as a little less extreme as it was in my days on Earth (although since you are all forced to buy these cheap goods Made In China, you support the kind of slavery that existed then as it exists today and is sanctioned by this New World Order run US government which has sold your jobs out to China and other countries where labor laws aren’t watched by our strict and humane labor practices here in America). The definition I want to put out there as Slavery IS when you work most of your life away just so you can afford to live. Forgot what a vacation was? Can’t afford that new car and have to keep driving that SUV (that the mainstream media said was the cool thing to buy a few years ago) that sucks down your paycheck? Forced to foreclose on your mortgage and move into a small apartment? Had to get a second or third job to pay the interest on your debts? Noticed that your heating bill has caused you to live in the cold? Food getting too expensive to abide by the FDA Food Pyramid? The all-seeing eye of those one dollar bills dominating your knot? Health insurance Blues instead of Blue Cross? People, THIS IS CALLED SLAVERY. That pain in your back from working 60 to 80 hours a week might not be a from the lash of a whip, and if you are the ancestor of a slave, please don’t be offended by my comparisons, but the bottom line here is that these tyrannical people in the government today are slowly but surely enslaving you. Corporatism IS THE SAME THING AS FACISM. Don’t blur the fine line between corporatism and capitalism to use this statement against me please, do your research. WAKE THE F^<# UP! I said the following when I was the President, and now it has more than become true:
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country; corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in High Places will follow, and the Money Power of the Country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed.
But I also said this important hit piece against the Bankers taking over YOUR money:
The government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers. By adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.
My feeling today is that the citizens of this country no longer know the feeling of freedom from the slavery of the dollar bill. Materialism conditioned the people to sacrifice their freedom to the dollar, and now, materialism is giving way to essentials. After that, you are talking about nothing less than total slavery.
A note to strongvet who Said on
December 4th, 2007 at 1:09 am
We need this bill to fight radical islamists (improper) wake up people
I said long ago
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
You, my friend, are the one who needs to wake up. This bill has nothing to do with Radical Islamics (proper). Are you illiterate and couldn’t read the bill before spouting off that lame statement? If so, I apologize – but PLEASE, for the love of God, have someone read you the bill so you know what it says. The bill clearly states that it does not discriminate against race, creed, religious belief, etc. In fact, it emphasizes this point more than once. So, smell the coffee. I’ve been dead for over a hundred frickin years, but I am wide awake strongvet. You are the one who is sleepy - your eyes are sandy feeling from all the propaganda that you’ve been sucking in from the mainstream media. You are hypnotized by the steady metronome of pundants and phony supermodel looking journalists repeating the same rhetorical insights into whats going on in the world. You are so sleepy, in fact, that you are too mesmerized to do some basic research on your own to find out what this bill is about (not to mention the true threat that Islamic Fundamentalists pose to the American Government or its Citizens, which used to be one and the same: that threat is literally non-existent). It is solely about domestic terrorists. Are you trying to say that there is a large consortium of domestic radical Islamic fundamentalists in the US? If that’s the case you better ask Homeland Security, the FBI, the NSA, your local overly vigilant law enforcement agencies, the US Border Patrol and ICE for your tax money back you ass spelunking toolbox.
One more thing I want to mention, a little off the subject, but as an honest President, I feel I have to remind the people of this once great nation why you became an independent sovereign nation in the first place. Taxation without representation. Income Tax, energy tax, you name it - especially since probably less than half of you understand what National Debt and the Deficit even are, much less that the Federal Reserve is a Privately Owned Banking Establishment: all of which are Unconstitutional. We ran the government just fine when I was President without any of those taxes.
So again, I URGE people to please wake up. Please resist this and all the past attempts at the crooks in your current government to strip you of your basic freedoms. Most of all - be vigilant of these Domestic enemies that are about to sell you out and take away your freedoms that are beyond just what you would consider basic. For example, the NSA shouldn’t be scanning this posting with AI computer programs, but it will be and that’s cool because I am at an Internet Cafe in Heaven. If some black helicopters start flying by under these clouds, I’m gonna pull the bill of my hat down to cover my face so they can’t face scan me and read my descent towards their spying actions. I said it then, and I WILL say it now – so your HR 1955 enforcers can come and get me if this is non compliant to this new code of conduct that the Government feels we should accept:
This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their Constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it.
Abe Lincoln
January 21st, 2008 at 11:46 am
and by the way
exercise your power to write in a vote for Ron Paul. Anyone who criticizes Paul usually ends up sounding like part of this Fascist movement in America to take away your liberties for protection - a tactic dictators have practiced since the beginning of civilization.
January 23rd, 2008 at 6:35 pm
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
— John Hancock
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
January 25th, 2008 at 3:05 am
I just emailed my senator to vote “nay”. So should you.
January 27th, 2008 at 3:08 am
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at the truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the numbers of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received?
Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlement assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation.
There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free–if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength but irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extentuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace–but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION!!!!!
May 4th, 2008 at 5:26 am
So much negative energy spent on criticizing Congressman Ron Paul, a Representative in the House of Representatives. If he were a Senator, we would call him Senator Ron Paul. You should know the character of this man by now Fred/Freddy and all that he stands for. Just so you won’t miss it I have cut and pasted his response to H.S. 1955 and his regret for “unavoidably” being out of town and unable to vote. I also understand that this bill will go to the Senate as S1959 to be voted on. Hoof and mouth disease is easily cured…think and research before you speak.
Dr. Paul..thanks for taking the time to let us know where you stand. We’re still standing for you!!
December 7, 2007
‘Homegrown Terror’ Act an Attack on Internet Freedom?
by Rep. Ron Paul
Before the US House of Representatives, December 5, 2007
I regret that I was unavoidably out of town on October 23, 2007, when a vote was taken on HR 1955, the Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted against this misguided and dangerous piece of legislation. This legislation focuses the weight of the US government inward toward its own citizens under the guise of protecting us against “violent radicalization.”
I would like to note that this legislation was brought to the floor for a vote under suspension of regular order. These so-called “suspension” bills are meant to be non-controversial, thereby negating the need for the more complete and open debate allowed under regular order. It is difficult for me to believe that none of my colleagues in Congress view HR 1955, with its troubling civil liberties implications, as “non-controversial.”
There are many causes for concern in HR 1955. The legislation specifically singles out the Internet for “facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process” in the United States. Such language may well be the first step toward US government regulation of what we are allowed to access on the Internet. Are we, for our own good, to be subjected to the kind of governmental control of the Internet that we see in unfree societies? This bill certainly sets us on that course.
This seems to be an unwise and dangerous solution in search of a real problem. Previous acts of ideologically-motivated violence, though rare, have been resolved successfully using law enforcement techniques, existing laws against violence, and our court system. Even if there were a surge of “violent radicalization” – a claim for which there is no evidence – there is no reason to believe that our criminal justice system is so flawed and weak as to be incapable of trying and punishing those who perpetrate violent acts.
This legislation will set up a new government bureaucracy to monitor and further study the as-yet undemonstrated pressing problem of homegrown terrorism and radicalization. It will no doubt prove to be another bureaucracy that artificially inflates problems so as to guarantee its future existence and funding. But it may do so at great further expense to our civil liberties. What disturbs me most about this legislation is that it leaves the door wide open for the broadest definition of what constitutes “radicalization.” Could otherwise nonviolent anti-tax, antiwar, or anti-abortion groups fall under the watchful eye of this new government commission? Assurances otherwise in this legislation are unconvincing.
In addition, this legislation will create a Department of Homeland Security-established university-based body to further study radicalization and to “contribute to the establishment of training, written materials, information, analytical assistance and professional resources to aid in combating violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.” I wonder whether this is really a legitimate role for institutes of higher learning in a free society.
Legislation such as this demands heavy-handed governmental action against American citizens where no crime has been committed. It is yet another attack on our Constitutionally- protected civil liberties. It is my sincere hope that we will reject such approaches to security, which will fail at their stated goal at a great cost to our way of life.
June 9th, 2008 at 7:15 am
We are a nation of sheep, our forefathers would have rebelled by now.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:05 am
Kucinich. Dec 15.
http://www.december152007.com