State Terror: H.R. 1955 a Weapon of Mass Destruction of Civil Liberties
Concerning the graduated repression of the Nazi regime, the Reverend Martin Niemoller, in 1945, stated, to the effect:
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
Though this quote has taken on many forms and endured several disputes, the ultimate interpretation stands. That silence about liberty infractions equals civil death.
Further, on the notion of leading the public headstrong into oblivion, the Nazis said it best:
“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Hermann Goering, 1946
Thus describes in many ways America today. From 9/11 to the non-sequitor of Iraq we've witnessed the success of establishment deceit, from violations of international law to constitutional abrogation. Not just in foreign affairs, but in domestic terms.
Consider the Ramifications of H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, Americans ought take note.
This is a controversial issue, but, it’s a very important one that threads past to present. The following is a civic exercise and rough draft of thoughts to come...updates soon on the horizon. Until then...
Recently, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1955, Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, by a staggering vote of 404 to 6. In hearings for the bill, testimony focused on political and peace activist groups in the U.S. and linked them with extremist groups abroad and claimed the two were the same in terms of a threat to Americans. This is the same tactic used dating back to the 19th century in America, so it is nothing new. But is it commensurate with American values ensconced in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence?
Enter the thought police.
The use of propaganda to disinform the public and instill fear in the American population, especially to lead to war has been well established (Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII,Viet Nam and the Gulf of Tonkin, and most recently 9/11, WMD’s and Iraq to name a few). It was also commonplace for Congress to pass laws restricting the rights of citizens in the name of freedom and security. Remember the Espionage and Sedition Acts from WWI used to suppress criticism of government? The A. Mitchell Palmer Raids and the Red Scare after WWI? The internment camps in WWII for the Japanese? Senator Joseph McCarthy during the 1950’s and his Communist witch hunts based on false figures and conjecture? COINTELPRO during the Cold War and Viet Nam, all used to clamp down on free speech and assembly rights while the F.B.I. infiltrated peace groups as agent provocateurs and tried to force violence to discredit the antiwar movement and civil rights leaders? All this in the land of the free and home of the brave.
After 9/11 we had the USA PATRIOT Act, the suspension of Habeas Corpus, indefinite detentions, extraordinary rendition, flouting of international law, torture, and enemy combatants with no legal counsel held in off shore military prisons. Now, continuing the trend of rolling back founding principles and stifling debate and dissent, the Congress strikes again. This is a bipartisan measure, so it is not merely a one party issue. The outcry to this recent bill, while just beginning, is also very diverse consisting of veterans, NRA folks on the right as well as many civil libertarians and other veterans on the left. In fact, many groups opposing the USA PATRIOT Act have chimed in already. Read on...
Chief among the claims of those testifying to Congress about the “need” for this bill, which included groups with close ties to government and military industrial complex over the years like the Rand Corporation, was that anyone that questions the official government line on 9/11 is akin to a terrorist or material supporter to terrorism. One speaker, Mark Weitzman of the Wiesenthal Center (ironically founded by Holocaust survivor Simon Wiesenthal to educate the public about war crimes), claimed that architects, engineers, and scientists that questions the official 9/11 narrative are the same as alleged violent Jihadist groups. This is the latest round of official conflation between terrorists and activists in the U.S. recently examined through the USA PATRIOT Act by Nancy Chang in her work “Silencing Political Dissent” at the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York. Is there a link between these aforementioned groups? No, there is not. But that didn’t stop these folks from simply saying so on the public record while providing no evidence. And Jane Harmon, co-sponsor of the bill, a Democrat from southern CA., didn’t ask for any. Just like McCarthy. See the C-Span Video Footage for more details and context.
Given the government's own admission in several separate studies that they have not concluded how the WTC and towers Building 7 were destroyed, that the official commission report was widely censored by Bush loyalists, and that the F.B.I. dropped it's quest for Bin Laden due to lack of evidence (and the CIA disbanded the unit in charge of looking for him), over a third of Americans when polled still question what happened that day and who was responsible. Even NIST officials conducting the most thorough official investigation into Building 7 in New York claimed their work was flawed and hampered by significant restrictions.
While this in no way implicates any particular parties for the events of 9/11, it does lead reasonable people that have researched the facts to conclude a new investigation is needed and many questions have not been answered. The families of the victims of 9/11 submitted hundreds of questions to the commission, 3/4 of them went ignored or unanswered. We as Americans deserve better. Now these people are being potentially criminalized for their questions and nonviolent actions. Also, more personally, I teach a critical thinking course on 9/11. According to the language in the bill, I could be sent to prison for asking people to think for themselves based on factual evidence. In America, do you think this is appropriate action by government?
Regardless if one believes the counter arguments about 9/11 in America’s recent past, should these people be criminalized for questioning the government and asking for another inquiry into that fateful day? Review materials below, then opine supported by evidence as to what you think about this current situation. This is a civic exercise. Do we really live in a republic, a society based on principles of liberty? If so, we need to examine all of this.
NOTES:
The Text of H.R. 1955:
H.R. 1955
The video on C-Span (see after 39 minutes for specifics) of some supporters:
Video Footage
One of the sites shown alongside terror groups in a guilt by association tactic, this one founded by a Bay Area Republican and 20 year architect, Richard Gage:
AE911
Reactions:
911 Blogger
Details
Thought Crime
9/11 Terrorist Conflation
NRA Style Rebuttals
Center for Constitutional Rights Views
General info on 9/11 alternative views and unanswered questions:
Unanswered Questions from 9/11
9/11 Truth
9/11 Research
Random thoughts on 9/11, propaganda, and American history:
Mythinfo Blog
Discourse and widespread awareness through education is one way to address these key issues. Possible discussion prompts with friends, family, and the general public:
Remember, this can be a civic exercise. That's what counts. Watch the video, read the texts, see the reactions and consider the following: Is it commensurate with American values ensconced in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence? Should people be criminalized for questioning the government and asking for another inquiry into 9/11 related issues? Why or why not? Are nonviolent groups that question the government on 9/11 issues the same threat as alleged Jihadist groups? How do you see this as part of a trend of repression of dissident voices in America? Explain and support. Talk to your family, your friends, strangers, your foes. Give it a go! The survival of our republic depends upon it. This is up to us, the people!
A final word from Benjamin Franklin:
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
Where do you stand at this crucial juncture in American history?
Vox Populi
--This posting was also published here.
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
Though this quote has taken on many forms and endured several disputes, the ultimate interpretation stands. That silence about liberty infractions equals civil death.
Further, on the notion of leading the public headstrong into oblivion, the Nazis said it best:
“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Hermann Goering, 1946
Thus describes in many ways America today. From 9/11 to the non-sequitor of Iraq we've witnessed the success of establishment deceit, from violations of international law to constitutional abrogation. Not just in foreign affairs, but in domestic terms.
Consider the Ramifications of H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, Americans ought take note.
This is a controversial issue, but, it’s a very important one that threads past to present. The following is a civic exercise and rough draft of thoughts to come...updates soon on the horizon. Until then...
Recently, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1955, Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, by a staggering vote of 404 to 6. In hearings for the bill, testimony focused on political and peace activist groups in the U.S. and linked them with extremist groups abroad and claimed the two were the same in terms of a threat to Americans. This is the same tactic used dating back to the 19th century in America, so it is nothing new. But is it commensurate with American values ensconced in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence?
Enter the thought police.
The use of propaganda to disinform the public and instill fear in the American population, especially to lead to war has been well established (Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII,Viet Nam and the Gulf of Tonkin, and most recently 9/11, WMD’s and Iraq to name a few). It was also commonplace for Congress to pass laws restricting the rights of citizens in the name of freedom and security. Remember the Espionage and Sedition Acts from WWI used to suppress criticism of government? The A. Mitchell Palmer Raids and the Red Scare after WWI? The internment camps in WWII for the Japanese? Senator Joseph McCarthy during the 1950’s and his Communist witch hunts based on false figures and conjecture? COINTELPRO during the Cold War and Viet Nam, all used to clamp down on free speech and assembly rights while the F.B.I. infiltrated peace groups as agent provocateurs and tried to force violence to discredit the antiwar movement and civil rights leaders? All this in the land of the free and home of the brave.
After 9/11 we had the USA PATRIOT Act, the suspension of Habeas Corpus, indefinite detentions, extraordinary rendition, flouting of international law, torture, and enemy combatants with no legal counsel held in off shore military prisons. Now, continuing the trend of rolling back founding principles and stifling debate and dissent, the Congress strikes again. This is a bipartisan measure, so it is not merely a one party issue. The outcry to this recent bill, while just beginning, is also very diverse consisting of veterans, NRA folks on the right as well as many civil libertarians and other veterans on the left. In fact, many groups opposing the USA PATRIOT Act have chimed in already. Read on...
Chief among the claims of those testifying to Congress about the “need” for this bill, which included groups with close ties to government and military industrial complex over the years like the Rand Corporation, was that anyone that questions the official government line on 9/11 is akin to a terrorist or material supporter to terrorism. One speaker, Mark Weitzman of the Wiesenthal Center (ironically founded by Holocaust survivor Simon Wiesenthal to educate the public about war crimes), claimed that architects, engineers, and scientists that questions the official 9/11 narrative are the same as alleged violent Jihadist groups. This is the latest round of official conflation between terrorists and activists in the U.S. recently examined through the USA PATRIOT Act by Nancy Chang in her work “Silencing Political Dissent” at the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York. Is there a link between these aforementioned groups? No, there is not. But that didn’t stop these folks from simply saying so on the public record while providing no evidence. And Jane Harmon, co-sponsor of the bill, a Democrat from southern CA., didn’t ask for any. Just like McCarthy. See the C-Span Video Footage for more details and context.
Given the government's own admission in several separate studies that they have not concluded how the WTC and towers Building 7 were destroyed, that the official commission report was widely censored by Bush loyalists, and that the F.B.I. dropped it's quest for Bin Laden due to lack of evidence (and the CIA disbanded the unit in charge of looking for him), over a third of Americans when polled still question what happened that day and who was responsible. Even NIST officials conducting the most thorough official investigation into Building 7 in New York claimed their work was flawed and hampered by significant restrictions.
While this in no way implicates any particular parties for the events of 9/11, it does lead reasonable people that have researched the facts to conclude a new investigation is needed and many questions have not been answered. The families of the victims of 9/11 submitted hundreds of questions to the commission, 3/4 of them went ignored or unanswered. We as Americans deserve better. Now these people are being potentially criminalized for their questions and nonviolent actions. Also, more personally, I teach a critical thinking course on 9/11. According to the language in the bill, I could be sent to prison for asking people to think for themselves based on factual evidence. In America, do you think this is appropriate action by government?
Regardless if one believes the counter arguments about 9/11 in America’s recent past, should these people be criminalized for questioning the government and asking for another inquiry into that fateful day? Review materials below, then opine supported by evidence as to what you think about this current situation. This is a civic exercise. Do we really live in a republic, a society based on principles of liberty? If so, we need to examine all of this.
NOTES:
The Text of H.R. 1955:
H.R. 1955
The video on C-Span (see after 39 minutes for specifics) of some supporters:
Video Footage
One of the sites shown alongside terror groups in a guilt by association tactic, this one founded by a Bay Area Republican and 20 year architect, Richard Gage:
AE911
Reactions:
911 Blogger
Details
Thought Crime
9/11 Terrorist Conflation
NRA Style Rebuttals
Center for Constitutional Rights Views
General info on 9/11 alternative views and unanswered questions:
Unanswered Questions from 9/11
9/11 Truth
9/11 Research
Random thoughts on 9/11, propaganda, and American history:
Mythinfo Blog
Discourse and widespread awareness through education is one way to address these key issues. Possible discussion prompts with friends, family, and the general public:
Remember, this can be a civic exercise. That's what counts. Watch the video, read the texts, see the reactions and consider the following: Is it commensurate with American values ensconced in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence? Should people be criminalized for questioning the government and asking for another inquiry into 9/11 related issues? Why or why not? Are nonviolent groups that question the government on 9/11 issues the same threat as alleged Jihadist groups? How do you see this as part of a trend of repression of dissident voices in America? Explain and support. Talk to your family, your friends, strangers, your foes. Give it a go! The survival of our republic depends upon it. This is up to us, the people!
A final word from Benjamin Franklin:
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
Where do you stand at this crucial juncture in American history?
Vox Populi
--This posting was also published here.
posted by mythinfo at 12:40 PM
9 Comments:
Excellent review of the dangers of HR1955, and assorted other draconian measures. And I especially appreciate the very reasonable message behind this--that addressing these issues is a "civic exercise," a point for discussion among friends and family, neighbors and strangers. Are we, or are we not, allowed to discuss the state of our nation, ask questions, express concerns about what's happening? And if we do that, are we 'allowed' to do so without immediate dismissal as paranoid nuts or Chicken Littles, let alone dangerous criminals and terrorists. Are we willing to allow a resurgence of the scare tactics and silencing of dissent we've seen here in the US in the past? Do we even know enough of our own history to recognize them? Or are we too afraid to even acknowledge what we know is happening? (Naomi Wolf's recent book, "End of America," and video/audio presentations lay out this case more urgently than anything I've seen.)
To me, the question comes down to this: Do we truly want a Constitutional Republic or not? Do we want to live in a Constitutional Republic enough to think/speak/act to keep it? As we say, "Democracy is not a spectator sport."
Thanks for this great summary and intro. I'd like to see this distributed to every high school and college classroom, every newspaper's op-ed section (the front page would be even better!), and see people massively organizing town halls and chataquas to TALK about what's happening, and STRATEGIZE to restore our Republic... our "safe" silence will only feed the machine.
Dear MI,
Thanks for your perspective on yet another one of congress's legislative disgraces. There are just too many to count, aren't there?
I have a friend who was raised in Nazi Germany in the 30's and she remembers the rise of the Nazis very well. She told me of how many similarities there is between then and now in terms of setting up the police state and preparing for all out war. Naomi Wolf also writes about this pattern of turning a state towards fascism in her latest book "The End of America: A letter of warning to a young patriot." The ten-step program.
I am almost finished with Naomi Klein's new book "the Shock Doctrine" and I have to say that is probably one of the most important books I have read in the last few years. The workings of an evil elite who just keep circulating (I am talking Kissinger, Armitage, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Pearl, et al.) through government and industry is just stunning and heartbreaking.
We, collectively the world's good people, will never win any semblance of liberty and freedom (and sanity) as long as these people walk the streets and stay above the law. It will not be good enough to get Bush or Cheney out of office. As you pointed out, it is Jane Harman and most Democrats are playing along with this charade called the "War on Terror." (By the way, Jane Harman is one of the richest members of Congress and that freak Glenn Beck on CNN recently got a $50 million contract for selling out the American people.)
Anyway, we have a lot of work to do and thanks so much for doing your part to educate people to this problem. We need a lot more people like you.
Cheers!
--Redpill8
Did you have a link to websites considered to be "terrorists"?
Eric Swan@ eswan@yahoo.com Thank you Janet Mathews. You have an accurate grasp of the obvious. Has it ever occured to you that half of the tallent has been excluded from the game? Ie, women.
I believe it is time for the people to take a hard look at who there representitives are and remove them from office they are doing a great diservice to the people of the united state of America and the constitution.by passing such draconian measures. They are looking out for there best intrests to maintain there postitions of power. We elect them to represent the people. They don,t ratify the constitution as required they just keep passing un-constittutional laws that are null and void. Take note of the bad apples that want to take away our freedoms to further the NWO. As they steel our freedoms right out from under our noses it is the uniformed that are destroying this once great nation they will continue to control us through fear, lies and deciet. America had better wake up or be slaves to the system. this is not paranoia it is fact. HR1955 is another nail in the coffin for freedom loving People.Don,t tread on me with your so called laws that take away our freedoms.
Thanks for all your feedback and commentary. Great books mentioned by the Naomi's, too. If you look at the C-Span link, you can see the sites Mark Weitzman lumped together, including 911truth.org and AE911truth.org. Great remarks, too, about the need for all-inclusive politics and participatory citizenry. We, the people of this country, not the established order, need to reclaim liberty. H.R. 1955 is a line that's been drawn and we must stand our ground and let the elites know we will not accept anymore attacks against our individual or collective civil rights nor will we tolerate the politics of division.
how dare rat dem jane harmon smear911 truthers as violence and terrorism prone when they more than everyone expose terrorism as benefitting only the military industrial stste;the real culprit which often allows and perpetrates it to justify fascism and war.
Jane Harmon revealed that the Bush administration knowingly lied to Senators to scare them into voting for the last FISA-gutting bill, using "bogus" intelligence. They lied to gain greater legal authority to invade our privacy and search us without probable cause... That is treason, Ms Harmon, and most of us learned about it on the internet since the mainstream media didn't cover it.
Why are you now working with the thought police to invade people's free speech and privacy further? The associations your speakers spliced together were absolute bullshit, and clear examples of why the internet has to remain free and open. Besides that, if their examples are accurate (questionable), then the internet is an excellent intelligence tool for monitoring them, don't you think?
What a crock of shit.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home