http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/32886prs20071128.html
ACLU’s statement about the bill. They voice the concern that the Act targets thought and not action, will “more likely to lead to unconstitutional restrictions on speech and belief”, will increase racial profiling, that “we cannot in good conscience support this or any measure that might lead to censorship and persecution based solely on one’s personal beliefs“.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/opedne_michael__071218_internet_thought_con.htm
This is Michael Collins’s excellent rebuttal to the Department of Homeland Security’s own rebuttals to concerns which have been voiced about the bill. Particularly the statement they have made that the bill does not clamp down on civil liberties is hereby unequivocally proven to be false. Superb!
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_kathryn__071214_the_war_of_terror_3a_c.htm
In this open letter to Rep. Jane Harmon and Sen. Susan Collins, I have a) argued the legal claims of the bill and proven that it does, contrary to the claims of the Dept. of Homeland Security, clamp down on civil liberties b) provided ample links from the ACLU’s and other websites, proving that it is activists and not terrorists who are clamped down on in post-911 America c) further, I make a case for the fact that the term “terrorist” and “terrorism” is being used interchangeably with “Vocal citizen” and again I have proven it with facts to back up the claim. Statistics above and beyond the links provided support the assertion.
My argument is based on having served on the board of my local ACLU Chapter, having read the ACLU’s website statistics and post-911 legislation for seven years, and having lived next door to the Iron Curtain where many scenarios I witnessed opened up my eyes as a citizen. Those experiences have made me acutely aware of the outcome which post-911 legislation will bring to reality. And because we Americans are blissfully accustomed to our freedom, most will not believe these realities for what they are until they see the links I have provided here.
It is not intended that each and every link be read: Too much work. Each link’s contents are summarized to illustrate the point that innocent (and vocal) people are the ones being targeted. IF ANY ONE LINK WAS THE ONE AND ONLY ONE TO LOOK AT TO PROVE THAT INNOCENT AMERICANS ARE THE “TERRORIST“ SCAPEGOATS, I SUGGEST THIS ONE:
http://www.rightsmatter.org/multimedia/
I ALSO HIGHLY RECOMMEND:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032201882_pf.html
Finally, here a point not mentioned in other legal analyses I have seen of this bill: In stating the facts below quoted from the text of the bill S. 1959, the government is very accurately describing itself. Not only are the matters threatened or implied, but even being carried out by the government, on a world-wide and national scale. If this bill passes into law, we can turn the tables right back on them and “get them” for it, legally:
Ideologically based violence.- The term “ideologically based violence” means the use, planned, use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual’s political, religious or social beliefs”. JUST WHAT THE GOV”T IS GUILTY OF. LET THEM PASS IT INTO LAW AND FALL INTO THEIR OWN SNARE. YAY!
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
