 |
|
Add to My Group
|
December 18, 2007 at 06:02:43
Congress Brings You... Thought Control on the Internet by Michael Collins Page 1 of 4 page(s) 
|
|
 
|
By an Overwhelming Majority Congress Brings You… Thought Control on the Internet By Michael Collins
Image
Washington, D.C. - Part 1
Cracking the Code – Who's to Blame for "Violent Radicalization"?
The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a 404 to 6 vote on Oct. 23. Not since the Iraq War Resolution have Democrats and Republicans found such a unifying cause. We're told that House Resolution 1955 (H.R. 1955) will be an essential tool enabling law enforcement to peg the sources of "homegrown terrorism" on the Internet.
The overwhelming bipartisan support makes it no surprise that the legislation presents a significant danger to citizens and the nation. This sentence is the new heart of darkness for free speech.
(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION - The term 'violent radicalization' means 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. (Author's emphasis) (House Resolution 1955)
That one word, "facilitating," takes the bill beyond aiding the hunt for terrorists on the Internet. It creates an emerging standard for wrongdoing that can be applied to everyone who exercises net-based free speech. Senate 1959, the equivalent of H.R. 1955, is up for consideration now.
Here are some scenarios under the bill that could easily be called "thought crimes", i.e., "facilitating violent radicalization."
You post one of these statements on the Internet …
• You are extremely upset about what you see as the nation's most serious problem – illegal immigration. You go to your Internet forum of choice and write a barn burner stating clearly that this administration and Congress are attacking the nation, breaking laws, and a threat to the safety of the people.
• You find the deaths of American soldiers and 1.1 million Iraqi civilians totally unacceptable. You go to your Internet forum of choice and write a very strong post accusing the president and his henchmen with war crimes.
• You're a former Reagan official, a "paleo-conservative." You argue that this administration's behavior represents tyrannical rule. You write a column published on the Internet where you ask questions about 911: "Who benefits? This question was conspicuously absent from the official investigation." You answer by naming Bush, Cheney, the Federalist Society and others.
You question the collapse of the WTC towers and conclude by arguing that a major casualty of 911"is the civil liberties that protect Americans from tyranny. President Bush and his corrupt Department of Justice (sic) have declared our constitutional protections to be null and void at the whim of the executive." Paul Craig Roberts, Sept. 10, 2007
… and a terrorist reads it. That terrorist subsequently commits a violent act. You don't know the person. You're not affiliated with him or her in any way. You don't advocate violence in your post nor do you approve of violence to achieve political goals.
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Vote NO on s. 1959
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 8 comments |
|
yikes!
thank you Michael for exposing the seamy side of current political life. yikes again! by Joan Brunwasser (221 articles, 3774 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 775 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007 at 6:53:47 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: Good work. Congress has really lost it!
And these are the Deomcrats. What's next? Personal bots to follow us around the net and warn us when we're near a dangerous site. Great move. Obama is obviously hearing a great deal about this one;) by Michael Collins (134 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 498 comments [43 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:28:38 AM (0+)
|
|
Free Speech
Another nail in the coffin of the Constitution. Hurry up Ron Paul...help. by ronheri (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 260 comments [51 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007 at 7:34:24 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Isn't it interesting to see who opposed tihs...
Kucinich and Paul. Ron Paul was furious that the bill came up in the way it did. The House rule for this period was routine bills, nothing major. Well, this is major and they screwed with him. That's why I quoted him, aside from the excellent point. This harkens back to the very worst laws the country ever had restricting free speech. I suspect that Paul will do something about this when he's back. by Michael Collins (134 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 498 comments [43 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:30:52 AM (0+)
|
|
Congress Brings You.. by Michael Collins
I have been searching NY Times and Washington Post every day for HR 1955 and have come up with nothing found on both papers. At first I puzzled but now I am angry. Both these papers are blacking out these reports. The blogs are alive with active reports every day on the developments around HR 1955 and now the Senate version. So here we have the very thing that couldn't happen in America-the Main Stream Media blocking an important story-and the Blogs providing excellent coverage. Of course, HR 1955 specifically targets the Internet as a venue for terrorist thought. The internet has been killing the Main Stream Media for years so that explains their blackout, to my mind. Everyone interested in keeping freedom should be up in arms and planning a way to beat back this attack on basic freedom. We have to start now and move quickly. s/ hank330 henry b stevens by hank330 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:49:02 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Hank Nails It!!!
That's the story, short and sweet. And that's a big part of the motivation. I put this line in specifically to avoid this article being marginalized: "What's Congress Up To? Clearly law enforcement needs to go where criminals congregate and needs to investigate, and make arrests. With or without this law, domestic and international criminals will continue to use the Internet for their goals and law enforcement will pursue them." There are bad actors out there, whatever we call them. In some cases they're terrorists. It makes perfect sense for law enforcement to go get 'em. But the do that now! This bill is all about "chilling" free speech; shutting us up; eliminating all the negative feedback Congress gets through the various campaigns, this one included. They don't want to hear from us, most of them. There are a few Reps who excel at constituent service, but damn few who serve their constituents. It's time to kick it up and stop this sucker. Excellent points. by Michael Collins (134 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 498 comments [43 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 19, 2007 at 12:54:46 AM (0+)
|
|
We are toast
Now if we criticize the bill we are terrorists. If we hold up a buck fush sign we are a terrorist. I seriously doubt we will be having elections in 2008 people, we waited too long to take action. We are controlled by foreigners that are bleeding us dry daily and now if we complain we are terrorists. Break out the butter and jam, we are toast. by john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 463 comments [25 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007 at 3:58:03 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: We may well be doomed
The very thoughts you have occurred to me when I decided to write these two articles on OpEdNews.Com. They didn't cause any distress but for a few seconds I though, "Jeez, do you really want to do this?" So I wrote two instead of one article;) It's never too late, however. I see current efforts to fight the regime as a post-defeat effort. It's been over for a long time, we just didn't realize it. Having said that, the most potent group action comes from people who are awake. The polls on Iraq and so forth show that. I think there will be about 12 people voting in some of these Democratic primaries. The turnout totals, particularly compared to 2004, will be telling. I could be wrong and Kucinich might get a big boost relative to the cyborgs or Edwards may "surge" and he may actually have gone through some conversion from his Iraq War Resolution, pro bankruptsy bill days. "They say I'm a dreamer"...roflmao. Sure. Has Santa visited you lately? :) by Michael Collins (134 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 498 comments [43 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 19, 2007 at 1:03:33 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
