Friday, December 28, 2007

DEMOCRATS CLOSE TO PASSING POLICE STATE LAW TO SUPPRESS POLITICS, SPEECH

BRUCE FEIN, WASHINGTON TIMES - Congress is perched to enact the "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 20007" Act, probably the greatest assault on free speech and association in the United States since the 1938 creation of the House Un-American Activities Committee. Sponsored by Rep. Jane Harman, California Democrat, the bill passed the House of Representatives on Oct. 23 by a 404-6 vote under a rule suspension that curtailed debate. To borrow from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, the First Amendment should not distract Congress from doing important business. The Senate companion bill, sponsored by Susan Collins, Maine Republican, has encountered little opposition. Especially in an election year, senators crave every opportunity to appear tough on terrorism. Few if any care about or understand either freedom of expression or the Thought Police dangers of S. 1959. Former President John Quincy Adams presciently lamented: "Democracy has no forefathers, it looks to no posterity, it is swallowed up in the present and thinks of nothing but itself."

Denuded of euphemisms and code words, the act aims to identify and stigmatize persons and groups who hold thoughts the government decrees correlate with homegrown terrorism, for example, opposition to the Patriot Act or the suspension of the great writ of habeas corpus.

The act will inexorably culminate in a government listing of homegrown terrorists or terrorist organizations without due process; a complementary listing of books, videos, or ideas that ostensibly further "violent radicalization;" and a blacklisting of persons who have intersected with either list.

Political discourse will be chilled and needed challenges to conventional wisdom will flag. There are no better examples of sinister congressional folly.

The act inflates the danger of homegrown terrorism manifold to justify creating a marquee National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Ideologically Based Violence . . . Since September 11, 2001, no American has died from homegrown terrorism, while about 120,000 have been murdered. . .

The commission's Big Brother task is to discover ideas and political associations, including connections to non-U.S. persons and networks, that promote "violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States." And "violent radicalization" is defined as "the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change."

Under the Act, William Lloyd Garrison would have been guilty of promoting "violent radicalization" for publishing the anti-slavery Liberator in 1831, which "facilitated" John Brown. Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton would have been condemned for assailing laws disenfranchising women and creating an intellectual atmosphere receptive to violence. And Martin Luther King, Jr. would have fallen under the Act's suspicion for denouncing Jim Crow and practicing civil disobedience, which "facilitated" H. Rap Brown. . .

Lengthy lists of persons, organizations and thoughts to be shunned will be compiled. Portions of the Holy Koran are likely to be taboo. The lives of countless innocent citizens will be shattered. That is the lesson of HUAC and every prior government enterprise to identify "dangerous" people or ideas — for example, the 120,000 innocent Japanese-Americans herded into concentration camps during World War II.

Bruce Fein is a constitutional lawyer with Bruce Fein & Associates and Chairman of the American Freedom Agenda.

8 Comments:

At December 28, 2007 3:00 PM, Anonymous robbie said...

I'm not surprised by this act. Dems are desperate to enhance their "terrorist killer" image, but they should be smarter than that. This whole notion that Dems aren't "strong enough on national defense"is a REPUBLICAN frame. They've got to stop letting the right-wing punditocracy define their issues.

 
At December 28, 2007 4:42 PM, Anonymous Faux Democracy said...

Dems are merely the OTHER capitalist party: they are serving the agendas of their masters.

 
At December 29, 2007 9:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If this isn't a call to action, what on earth is? Where is a Thomas Paine for this age? Oh, that's right, it's Sam Smith. Right person, wrong universe...

 
At December 30, 2007 11:08 AM, Anonymous Axel said...

Far be it for a Canadian to interfere in your affairs, but a secret corner of my heart wishes you would all vote for Cynthia McKinney.

 
At December 30, 2007 12:20 PM, Blogger The Wendigo said...

Faux Democracy spoke the truth. Anyone who still thinks there's a whit if MEANINGFUL difference between Repub and Dem ... well, that person needs to take a few weeks off work and devote him/herself to the examination of the actual campaign contributions and war chests of the 535 members of the US Congress and see just how different are their paying masters.

The only difference between Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton is their gender and their buzz phrasing. Their agendas are nearly identical.

The only difference between Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama is their skin tone and their buzz phrasing. Their agendas are nearly identical.

The only difference between Rudy Giuliani and John Edwards is in the types of lies that each man told in the courtroom, and that each man tells on the campaign trail. Their agendas are nearly identical.

Axel, I think you make a good suggestion. Unfortunately you will see that most "progressives" think that Cynthia McKinney is crazy, mainly because she won't play the DNC/DLC game of "lesser evil."

 
At December 31, 2007 1:38 PM, Anonymous J.J. said...

Hey Axel , I hope the Canadian immigration authorities will look kindly on hundreds of thousands of nearly simultaneous POLITICAL ASYLUM requests from the well-heeled wing of the don't wanna' live in a police state crowd down here in the ol' but no longer "good" United States?

Wonder if it would help if we signed pre-entry pledges to keep quiet & stay docile in our new home ... per our past practice South o' your border ?

- John A. Joslin , Detroit, IBEW member , McKinney supporter.

 
At December 31, 2007 2:42 PM, Blogger The Wendigo said...

Nicely said, John.

As an IBEW member, how easy is it for you to repatriate in Canada? I have friends who have moved there and their headaches -- several years before the Patriot Act and the Bush-Cheney Crime Syndicate -- were pretty legendary. They had to demonstrate that they had job skills that couldn't be found among Canadian residents, and they had to prove that there was a Canadian employer who looked for employable Canadians and couldn't find one to hire in preference over the American immigrant candidate.

Since electricians work an apprenticeship trade that requires skill development and guidance from the union shop, does that make your repatriation chance better?

Sadly, I don't have much in the way of unique skills. I am a lawyer and I would have to seek admission in a Canadian province bar. But in any case, lawyering is not my preferred line of work. I would much prefer to get paid for writing. Can you imagine trying to demonstrate that there is nobody in Canada who can write, or who could write as I do? BAH!

You can just jump to Windsor, eh?

From where I live, I have a few target towns in Canada that are nearly directly north of me. I'm a ways west of you. The province north of me is a good one, laid-back and mountainous just like where I live now... well, except the "laid-back" part.

Each passing day makes it harder for me to justify remaining in America.

 
At December 31, 2007 11:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@the wendigo:


You can immigrate, you have the education and job experience to qualify on paper, even if in reality you may find it hard to break into lawyering here.

I immigrated with a BA in Classics and five years experience as a library cataloger/IT guy. Granted I was 26 when I applied and single, just the demographics they want. It also put down I could read some French, which is true.

It took me about 15 months to get the thing fully done from initial send-in mailing to final official arrival. Had to take a medical, and get FBI check. Had to pay $2K all total. Had to prove I had $10K in the bank at the last minute, which I did by getting a huge US grad student loan all in one lump sum and showing them that deposit on paper.

I didn't wait the whole time out down south though; I moved in with a friend in Canada, found a Canadian wife, and made sure to tell them I got married to a Canadian, though it wasn't necessary to do so as I still qualified as skilled worker.

It tries your patience and your wallet, but it can be done. I apply for citizenship this year and can't wait.

Never going back to the USSA. Very happy here.

Good luck, see you up here soon maybe.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home