http://thomas.loc.gov/ (To read the bill, select "Search Bill Text" then enter S.1959)
H.R. 1955: "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes".
The House of Representatives passed this bill on Oct 23, 2007, by roll call vote held under a SUSPENSION OF THE RULES (a provision that allows the House to quickly pass 'non-controversial' bills) to cut debate short and pass the bill. The totals were 404 Ayes, 6 Nays. When the suspension was requested, only six members of the house were present for the vote. The bill has now been sent for vote in the Senate (Senate Bill 1959), and if passed will be signed into law by the President.
Unlike previous anti-terrorism legislation, this bill is directed specifically at the civilian population of the United States and is especially directed against internet freedom.
Critics have labeled it the Thought Crimes Prevention Act. 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 policies of the Administration, and brand patriotic Americans as terrorists.
Among the few dissenting voters was presidential hopeful Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) who said that he believes the proposed Act (H.R. 1955/S. 1959) is unconstitutional. "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."
So six years ago a handful of foreign criminals commit a terrorist act, and now the entire US population are potential terrorist suspects???
Of course, nobody wants another Timothy Mcvey, but who needs a third reich?
Our representatives in Washington D.C. have a sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. Four hundred and four members of the House have now directly violated that oath. Our trust has been severely misplaced. The language of this bill is disturbingly vague and ambiguous, and as I have said before, with great ambiguity, comes great power. This bill spells the end of free speech and dissent, the cornerstone of a free society.
Links:
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682http://metadave.wordpress.com/2008/01/12/hr-1955-war-on-freedom-kicks-americas-ass/http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9825287-38.html?tag=nefd.tophttp://www.newstarget.com/022308.htmlhttp://videos.emule.com/play/freedom-of-speech-and-hr-1955-pt-1-(9wJsovPRTEMDo your own research. Let me know what you think. My general question is do you believe this bill can be reconciled with the First Amendment, and if so, how do you justify that opinion? Broad discussion on the proposed legislation is also welcome.
Thanks,
