Amongst the most interesting of HR 1955's content is the 3rd paragraph of the "whereas" clauses which specifically targets the internet ---the only minimally controlled source of information and news that is distinguished from the corporate media conglomerates that have historically been the major source of jingoism, racism, and the yellow journalism that more than once served as the pimps for war---including the front page pimping for this latest slaughter of innocents by the New York Times through the Judith Miller articles that they own and copyrighted.
Here is what this "whereas" says;
"'(3) 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".
Harman, and the rest of the 404 Democratic and Republican representatives, must think that they are the arbiters of what is safe for us to read, of what is safe for us to see, of what is safe for us to hear, or safe for us to write, or safe for us to speak, as though they have any more intelligence or discernment than the rest of us.
In other words, you and they want to turn the tables on us --- instead of us, we the people, being the constitutionally designated arbiters of what you and they do, they and you want to be the arbiters of what we do.
Evidently, Jane Harman, the chief author of the bill and the 404 representatives that voted for it, are convinced that the number of people who mentally entertain thoughts of non-compliance with their authority is so numerous that the country is about to teeter into chaos or vote them out of office.
Maybe you and they know something about what has been done to us or is going to be done to us as they engage in the slaughter of innocents, ours and theirs, in the occupation of Iraq and the projected expansion of that slaughter into Iran that we don't.
I would suggest that you consider the provisions of Article 10 of the Constitution of New Hampshire and the comeuppance that it implies for your term of office,
"Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."
According to reports, you (Repr4esentative Welch) got a taste of what is in store for you at your last meeting with Vermont voters.
The way the Black Commentator's article put it, http://wwwblackcommentator.com/27/27_commentary.html
"The Bush men believe humanity will first recoil, then cower - that the world has no choice but to surrender in "Shock and Awe." The opposite is true. By initiating Permanent War, Bush presents the world - including, ultimately, the American people - with no choice but to turn on their tormentor, and remove him and his pirate class."
If you are of a mind to, I suggest that you write to Senator Leahy and to Senator Sanders to vote against the Bill when it comes before the Senate as S1959.
1 | 2
