Welcome To CT

My Left Nutmeg

A community-driven blog featuring news and commentary on local, state, and national politics.

helphaiti

Donate to CT Dems
Enable ActBlue
for CT Races
$
John Larson
(1st CD)
$
Joe Courtney
(2nd CD)
$
Rosa DeLauro
(3rd CD)
$
Jim Himes
(4th CD)
$
Chris Murphy
(5th CD)
$
Ads on My Left Nutmeg
 
 


 
Contact Info
To contact the site admin email ctblogger at ctblogger@yahoo.com

My Left Nutmeg

Call Your Senators Now -- Or Be Forever Sorry!

by: Ann Galloway

Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 11:04:49 AM EST


One of the most potentially repressive bills ever to be considered by Congress passed the House of Representatives last month by a vote of 404 to 6, with 22 not voting. H.R. 1955, called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, was introduced by California Democrat Jane Harman with 14 co-sponsors. Designed, supposedly "To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes," the language in this bill is so broad that it easily could incorporate the Orwellian concept of Thought Crimes.
Ann Galloway :: Call Your Senators Now -- Or Be Forever Sorry!
TRASHING THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Supporters say that the measure will help government and law enforcement officials to understand and prevent domestic terrorism; but critics are concerned that it is a thinly disguised attempt to criminalize dissent. The bill's vague and open-ended language could be used by the government to inhibit or prevent free speech and assembly, including legitimate dissent. Given the Government's predisposition to read our emails and listen to our telephone calls, Big Brother's ability to extend its presumption of guilt and detain ordinary, law-abiding citizens no longer is restricted to those pages between the cover of 1984.

As written, this legislation defines "violent radicalization" as "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." However, the bill does not define either what constitutes "an extremist belief system" or "facilitating ideologically based violence."  As a lifelong Democrat and Connecticut citizen who, in the past, voted for Joe Lieberman (I regret to say) and has since been referred to by this neo-con patsy as a "crazy jihadist" for opposing the Iraq War and supporting Ned Lamont last year -- it is very troubling to think that people of his ilk may be deciding whose belief systems are extremist in nature . . .

That this bill passed the House by such a large margin, and almost without notice, is particularly troubling.  This is not (and should not be) a political issue; it is a Constitutional one! Free speech and the freedom to assemble are the concerns of liberals and conservatives alike. Many of us are familiar with the continuing advocacy for the Rule of Law by Bruce Fein, a Constitutional lawyer who served in the Reagan Administration.  He contends that the unlawful practices of this Administration warrant Impeachment, while Nancy Pelosi chose to take this issue off the table from Day 1.

Now we have a Democrat who -- with the complicity of most other House members -- has provided an Administration-gone-wild with yet another tool in its efforts to dismantle the Rule of Law.  In one of the most ironic turns of this very sad and disturbing story, I encountered a brief ray of light from a most unlikely source.

STRANGE BUT WELCOME BEDFELLOWS

I lived in California and then attended the University of California between 1958 and 1963.  In those days, The John Birch Society represented the epitome of arch-conservative advocacy. So imagine my surprise to have come across the following; in fact, I practically fell off my chair!

In its section on key findings related to homegrown terrorism, the measure gives lip-service to constitutional rights, but also singles out the Internet and its open market for the flow of ideas and information as part of the problem. According to the measure, "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."

The unspoken threat implied by that passage is that the government might have to clamp down on free speech online. "At base," wrote retired Col. Dan Smith in Counterpunch, "Harman's proposal seems to be a direct attack on First Amendment rights."

http://www.capwiz.co....

If there is anything in this story that generates hope, it is that some people who hold widely disparate views nevertheless care mightily about our Constitutional system, especially the Bill of Rights which the Bush-Cheney regime seems intent upon trashing, albeit with the collusion of far too many members of Congress.

TAKE ACTION

Only the Senate stands between passage and total capitulation to the whims of an Administration that has demonstrated, time and again, that laws are to be broken and perverted at will. Our job is to do everything we can to stop this measure from becoming law. 

PLEASE CALL YOUR SENATORS TODAY; ASK YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS TO DO THE SAME; CALL REGULARLY AND OFTEN.  IF WE FAIL, IT ALL MIGHT BE OVER. . . MY LEFT NUTMEG AND THOSE OF US WHO POST HERE COULD BE EARLY TARGETS! 

[Cross-posted on Daily Kos]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Jane Harmon (0.00 / 0)
is a DLC member and a Blue Dog member.

Jane Harmon lost 38% of her support to Marcy Winograd in a three month campaign.

Had Marcy Winograd had six months she would have beat Harmon's ass.

Harmon spent: $1,173,313 [total 2006 spending primary+general]
(most of that spent in the primary)
Winograd spent: $372,949


The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


Thank you for this comment. (0.00 / 0)
You have highlighted one of the most critical issues that threaten our democracy: The role of big money in compromising the entire basis of our electoral system. Absent campaigns that are fully funded by public monies, there can be no relief; yet how many in Congress would vote to give up the huge incumbent advantage that the current system provides?

[ Parent ]
not just Jane Harmon/blue dogs (0.00 / 0)
In the House, the margin of victory for this bill was 404-6.  I think that from the perspective of preventing this from becoming law, it's important to keep in mind that it is not just the baby of Jane Harmon & Blue Dog democrats, it is owned by the vast majority of the Democratic Party members who serve in the House.

Here is a page that provides access to vote details:

http://www.govtrack....

The opposition was bipartisan -  3 Dems and 3 Republicans voted Nay. 

anyway, i do hope people follow Ann's advice and write their senators on this.  I suspect that many conservatives - those who adhere to privacy rights  - will vehemently oppose this monstrosity, and that will make this stoppable from a political perspective.



Call and Write . . . (0.00 / 0)
I agree that this is a bipartisan issue; and therefore, it should be possible to prevent passage of this bill.  But no one is paying much attention to it.  Absent an outcry, it easily could remain under the radar screen and pass.  That's why I think it is so important to make alot of noise about it!

[ Parent ]
for the purpose of facilitating (0.00 / 0)
In general I'm repulsed by the whole thing, but these words in particular: "for the purpose of facilitating..."

Who decides if promoting a certain belief system is for the purpose of facilitating violence? My understanding is that violence need not occur, just that the activity might promote violence.

A law like this could have been used to stop the entire civil rights movement. Certainly, some people in America viewed equal rights as an extremist belief system. Do the people in Washington even read this stuff before they vote? Makes me ill.


My point exactly! (0.00 / 0)
Every weazel word in this bill provides the Administration with more ammunition to use against the First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly. Either Congress is asleep at the switch, or else the Democratic leadership is colluding in our slide into fascism.  Either way, Pelosi and her minions are not doing their jobs, and a once-free country is oozing down the drain.

[ Parent ]
RESPONSE TO THE WIESENTHAL CENTER'S PRESENTATION AT THE HEARING FOR THIS BILL (0.00 / 0)
25 November 2007
Mark Weitzman
Simon Wiesenthal Center
59 East 42nd Street, Suite 1600
New York, NY 10017

Dear Mr. Weitzman,

It is with deep concern that we are requesting both a clarification and a retraction regarding several remarks you made at the Homeland Security sub-committee hearing on Terrorism Risk Assessment held on 6 November 2007.

In reference to the content of your PowerPoint presentation, you stated, "The presentation begins with a look at how 9/11 is viewed in some eyes online, including those who applauded it as well as some conspiracies sites. The presence of the conspiracy site is significant, since so much of what passes as fact online is actually based on some form of conspiracy." You later went on to say, "These people are constructing their own version of reality, full of conspiracy theories, full of doctored videos, that will recruit or inflame the emotions."

Given that the explicit mission of the Simon Wiesenthal Center is to confront "hate and terrorism" by "promoting human rights and dignity…. and teaching the lessons of the Holocaust for future generations," we find your flagrant use of the characterization "these people" to not only be incongruent with your stated mission, but also a chilling reminder of the rhetoric used to demonize Jews, Catholics, homosexuals, gypsies, et. al. during the reign of the Third Reich in the early and mid-twentieth century. By "these people" are you referring to Mindy Kleinberg, Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza and Lorie Van Auken, all widows after the 9/11 attacks who for 441 days battled against government apathy in bringing about a 9/11 investigation, whose stories and continued demands for answers are frequently referenced and who openly endorse many 9/11 websites? By "these people" are you likewise referring to Rabbi Michael Lerner, the prominent progressive Jewish activist who stated, "I salute the people … who are doing an amazing job of exposing what may prove to be one of the most perverse conspiracies in the history of democratic governments," or are you referring to highly decorated USAF Lt. Col. Robert Bowman PhD, Director of Advanced Space Systems under presidents Jimmie Carter and Gerald Ford, who defines the actions of many in the current administration regarding government misconduct on 9/11 as being nothing short of treasonous, and who similarly endorses the research and activities of many 9/11 websites? Had we paid attention to the plight of "these people" in the 1930s, six million innocents might have been spared their horrific fate and the Holocaust might have been reduced to a perverse aberration.

Equally disturbing in your PowerPoint presentation is the juxtaposition of the website Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.org with Taliban recruitment sites detailing how to make bombs, take captives and blow up buildings. How and why you equate American architectural and engineering professionals examining the nature of the destruction of three American architectural icons with radical fringe elements of Islamic extremism is not only unfathomable, but can justifiably be construed as being motivated by malicious intent. Within the context of the liberties protected in our constitutional republic, the United States of America is the freedom of intellectual pursuit and the right to challenge our government, its policies, its actions and non-actions.

Again, public clarification by you and the Simon Wiesenthal Center regarding these misconstrued associations is in order. Concerned and patriotic citizens across the country are anxiously waiting for your response.

Sincerely,
Boston911Truth
Boston, Massachusetts
http://www.Boston911...
truth@boston911truth.org

"If those in charge of our society...can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves." ~~Howard Zinn


Thank you for sharing this. . . (4.00 / 2)
What a sad commentary that the once respected Wiesenthal Center should become complicit in efforts to destroy legitimate dissent.  Please share with readers any response you receive.

[ Parent ]
 
2 user(s) logged on.
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Spotlight

Use the Spotlight tool to send a diary to offline journalists, with your feedback or suggestions.
(What is Spotlight?)


Search


   Advanced
My Left Nutmeg Feeds

Links


Connecticut's War Dead

Blogroll
Powered By
- SoapBlox

Connecticut Blogs
- Capitol Watch
- Colin McEnroe
- Connecticut2.com
- Connecticut Bob
- ConnecticutBlog
- CT Blue Blog
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Local Politics
- CT News Junkie
- CT Smart Growth
- CT Voices for Civil Justice
- CT Voters Count
- CT Weblogs
- CT Working Families Party
- CT Young Dems
- Cool Justice Report
- Democracy for CT
- Drinking Liberally (New Milford)
- East Haven Politics
- Emboldened
- Hat City Blog (Danbury)
- The Laurel
- LieberWatch
- NB Politicus (New Britain)
- New Haven Independent
- Nutmeg Grater
- Only In Bridgeport
- Political Capitol (Brian Lockhart)
- A Public Defender
- Rep. David McCluskey
- Rep. Tim O'Brien
- State Sen. Gary Lebeau
- Saramerica
- Stamford Talk
- Spazeboy
- The 40 Year Plan
- The Trough (Ted Mann: New London Day)
- Undercurrents (Hartford IMC)
- Wesleying
- Yale Democrats

CT Sites
- Clean Up CT
- CT Citizen Action Group
- CT Democratic Party
- CT For Lieberman Party
- CT General Assembly
- CT Secretary of State
- CT-N (Connecticut Network)
- Healthcare4every1.org
- Judith Blei Government Relations
- Love Makes A Family CT

CT Candidates
- Chris Murphy for Senate
- Susan Bysiewicz for Senate

- William Tong for Senate


Other State Blogs
- Alabama
- Arizona
- California
- Colorado
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New York
- North Carolina
- Ohio
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin



More blogs about connecticut+politics.
Technorati Blog Finder


 
Powered By
MLN is powered by SoapBlox
 
Powered by: SoapBlox