Despite the ambiguity of the language in H.R. 1955, it still passed the
House by an overwhelming 404 to 6 - rammed through by Jane Harman,
under the guise of deterring another American mass murderer like
Timothy McVeigh. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh
Point of fact: In recent years, America's most horrific mass
murderers have primarily been teenagers - Columbine's Harris and
Klebold, and the Omaha mall shooter, Robert Hawkins, to name just a
few. Virginia Tech 23 year old college student, Seung Hui Cho, murdered
32. None of their
"plans" would have been detected and prevented if H.R. 1955, or its Senate clone, S. 1959, had been in place at the time.
Among
the 404 deluded Congress members who voted for H.R. 1955 was California
Congresswoman Maxine Waters - one of the few progressive heroes in the
House. Odd that Congresswoman Waters would support legislation laden
with such ambiguous language. The definitions in this bill are written
so broadly that nearly anyone can be accused of
planning or threatening
terror if they disagree with their government and attempt to alter
policy. Considering Congresswoman Water's fabled advocacy for
participatory democracy, one might conclude she hadn't adequately read
the bill before voting for it.
Underscoring this contention
was Congresswoman Waters' apparent lack of understanding of the
blow-back from this bill. In a December 10th interview on Lila
Garrett's KPFK Pacifica Radio talk show,
"CONNECT THE DOTS," the Congresswoman said the following:
"I
do think that the American public, who have shown through the polls
that they want to end this war on Iraq, have not gotten angry enough
and they're not doing enough to force their elected officials to fight."
By imploring Americans to get angry and "
force
their elected officials to fight," Congresswoman Waters is asking her
"homegrown" supporters to carry forth actions that H.R. 1955
characterizes as "terrorism." With H.R. 1955 in place, if non-violent
anti-war activists make a
plan to
force the "furtherance of political or social objectives," they meet the bill's criteria for "homegrown terrorists."
Tragically, Congresswoman Waters' support for H.R. 1955 has endangered the rights of her supporters.
I'm
a huge admirer of Congresswoman Waters. I know how seriously she values
free speech, peaceful assembly, and the freedom to petition the
government as ordained by the First Amendment. I was surprised and
dismayed that she supported this bill. When I called her office last
Thursday to get a statement as to why she had, I was told by a staffer
that the Congresswoman had asked to see the bill just moments before.
It wouldn't surprise me if the Congresswoman did revisit her support
for the bill after THE PEOPLE so vocally opposed it. She may have even
instigated the formal written defense of the bill issued by the House
Majority Staff
in response to the public outrage.
However, THE PEOPLE are so incensed by this bill that the "official"
House response has not allayed their concerns in the least. The
language of the bill has not been altered or improved upon and remains
as inept as the Homeland Security Department charged with overseeing
it.
To
be fair, there is legitimate rationale for vigilance in protecting the
nation. Violence of any kind is intolerable - which explains why
millions of Americans oppose the current Bush regime. It deems
pro-peace groups un-American and imprisons their members routinely.
CODEPINK is a prime example.
During one week in 2004, over 1800
non violent Americans were arrested and jailed during the Republican
National Convention. Some have been harassed and arrested for T-shirts.
Some for the bumper stickers on their cars. Should it be any wonder why
millions of Americans are suspicious that at the very start of the 2008
Presidential election year, H.R. 1955 is born?
A nation that
views its own people as enemies creates laws to suppress them. A
Congress that ignores the will of its people creates laws to redefine
them. Homegrown activists become homegrown terrorists. Per the vague
designations in H.R. 1955, activists and terrorists are the same.
The
Senate version of H.R. 1955, S. 1959 is scheduled for vote this week.
Last week I called Senators Boxer, Feingold and Kennedy to see how they
would vote. I got a "we don't know yet" from Boxer's office. A staffer
for Feingold said his Senator would
vote against it
because it stifles free speech. Since Feingold was the lone Senator to
vote against the PATRIOT ACT, I'm hopeful his staffer is correct.
My
call to Senator Kennedy was prompted by the same rationale as my call
to Congresswoman Waters. On December 7th, in an article on the
HuffingtonPost, Senator Kennedy vented his anger over the CIA's
destruction of the prisoner interrogation tapes.
According to Senator Kennedy:
Because these tapes constituted necessary evidence for the
9/11 Commission, their destruction was illegal under "Section 1512 of
Title 18 of the United States Code [which] makes it a felony to
“corruptly alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal a record, document, or
other object... with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or
availability for use in an official proceeding.”
At the end of his article, Senator Kennedy made a pronouncement and a request to supporters. He said:
"I'm headed to the floor to demand answers. I hope you will demand them as well."
If Americans respond to Senator Kennedy's plea to
'demand answers,' and devise a
plan to
force
the "furtherance of political or social objectives," they too, can be
designated "homegrown terrorists" if S. 1959 is passed. These dutiful
patriots would be going forward at Senator Kennedy's behest, employing
acts he defined as "homegrown terrorism" if he votes this legislation
in place.
But this won't be the case if Senator Kennedy and his Senate
colleagues vote NO on S. 1959. If they vote it down, they earn the
right to engage their supporters to act on their behalf. If they vote
for it, they forfeit the right to put citizens at risk by requesting
their help.
One can only hope that Senators Kennedy, Boxer and
Feingold, and their 97 colleagues, won't make the same mistake in the
Senate that Congresswoman Waters and 403 of her colleagues made in the
House. When Legislators place Americans in the precarious circumstance
of teetering between activist and terrorist, they forego all claim to
public support.
The current government, including the Homeland
Security Department which will oversee this bill, has been incompetent
in intelligence gathering again and again. Just last week, the domestic
terrorism case against the so-called "Liberty City Seven," ended in a
mistrial. According to
The Washington Post:
"Evidence presented at the trial portrayed the "Liberty
City Seven" as a group of somewhat hapless low-income laborers, and
defense attorneys said the men had become ensnared in what they
characterized as an overzealous FBI investigation."
If S.
1959 passes the Senate, unfounded cases like this will occur with
greater regularity. Whomever the government seeks to silence will be
subjected to reprisal, fomented by a purposely ambiguous law.
It takes just one Senator to put a
HOLD on a bill to
stop it indefinitely. Right now it appears that Russ Feingold of
Wisconsin may be the one Senator who will do it. It would be
particularly significant if the four Democratic Senators running for
President would come together to stop this bill. Senators Clinton,
Obama, Biden and Dodd should demonstrate their leadership by quelling
this assault on dissent. Senator Dodd has already shown his heroism by
challenging retroactive immunity for telecom companies. He should not
be the only one! Senators Clinton and Obama should demonstrate respect
for THE PEOPLE by not voting against THE PEOPLE'S rights. Removing THE
PEOPLE'S freedoms is a symptom of fear -
not valor.
Senator
Kennedy uses his family tradition to ask Americans to participate in
their nation. With a belief in participatory democracy that deep, he
should stop this bill.
Senator Boxer, who regularly recruits
activists to push through legislation, should also stop this bill.
According to Marcy Winograd, President of Progressive Democrats of Los
Angeles, who challenged Harman for Congress in 2006:
"Senator
Boxer, one of our more courageous lawmakers, needs to put a hold on
this bill before we see a return of the McCarthy hearings, with
committees interrogating conscientious Americans who have spoken out
against the war and globalization. This legislation ostensibly targets
those who promote violence and extremist ideology, but if that were
really the case the lawmakers supporting this legislation would be
impeaching and indicting George Bush and Dick Cheney."
This First Amendment assault crosses party and ideological lines in the
same way as media consolidation. Progressives and conservatives alike
deplore the suppression of freedom. Even the ultra right wing John
Birch Society opposes H.R. 1955 and S. 1959. http://www.jbs.org/node/644
This week the Senate can support the First Amendment, or let the First Amendment die. S. 1959 must
NOT pass. Tell your Senators to vote
NO on S. 1959.
Email them here
Phone them at: (202) 224-3121
Writings 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
