H.R. 1955: Government Suppression of Free Thought and Free Expression
H.R. 1955 has been passed by the House, and is being debated in the Senate. Should this bill become law, those with "extremist belief systems" - as defined by the government - would be subjected to government scrutiny and worse for supposedly promoting "violent radicalization".
H.R. 1955: GOVERNMENT SUPPRESSION
OF FREE THOUGHT AND FREE EXPRESSION
Websites Dedicated to 9/11 Truth
Falsely Represented to Subcommittee
By David R. Kimball February 9, 2008
As defined by the government, do you have an "extremist belief system" which could be used to facilitate "ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change"? Then you could be guilty of "violent radicalization", and find yourself in the crosshairs of H.R. 1955 (and companion bill S. 1959), the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This proposed federal law was co-written by its sponsor, California Democrat Jane Harman. It was passed by the House on October 23, 2007 by a vote of 404 to 6, and is currently being deliberated in the Senate.
See link to www.govtrack.us for Bringing the War on Terrorism Home: Congress Considers How to 'Disrupt' Radical Movements in the United States, an article by Jessica Lee written on November 16, 2007, describing this proposed law in detail, and its implications.
Should a person be targeted by this new legislation if he or she simply researches scientific evidence to find the cause of an uninvestigated crime, and then advocates for an investigation of that crime? Yes, a person should be, according to Mark Weitzman of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, if that crime is called "9/11".
In a study of the "need" for H.R. 1955, the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment met in a special hearing on November 6, 2007. Mark Weitzman was one of four witnesses to give testimony on the topic "Using the Web as a Weapon: The Internet as a Tool for Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terror". Weitzman, in his presentation http://homeland.house.gov/SiteDocuments/20071106144414-90408.pdf, displayed - next to violent and militant jihad training-type websites - the truth-seeking and science-based websites http://www.911sharethetruth.com/ and http://homeland.house.gov/SiteDocuments/20071106144414-90408.pdf, displayed - next to violent and militant jihad training-type websites - the truth-seeking and science-based websites http://www.911sharethetruth.com/ and link to www.ae911truth.org, and made false and defamatory statements about these websites. In his testimony to the Subcommittee, he attempted to "prove" - by misrepresentation - that questioning the "official version" of 9/11 and searching for the truth should be considered "evidence" of possessing an "extremist belief system", which he believes should be subjected to government scrutiny.
911 Share the Truth.com and Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth.org are the websites of Gabriel Day and Richard Gage, respectfully, who each believe nothing more "extreme" than promoting justice by presenting educational information and facts from research about "9/11", and calling for a real investigation.
On December 10, 2007 Richard Gage sent and posted a formal response to Mark Weitzman's egregious statements, which can be found online at http://www.ae911truth.org/info/23 . Richard Gage rightfully demands a retraction, and a media-aired apology.
From hundreds and hundreds of "9/11" websites - some of them bogus - the two that Weitzman displayed as "examples" to the Subcommittee are considered by many to be two of the most effective and reasoned sources of 9/11 truth. Was this mere chance?
Jessica Lee reports in her article noted above that "many observers fear that the proposed law will be used against U.S.-based groups engaged in legal but unpopular political activism, ranging from political Islamists to animal-rights and environmental campaigners to radical right-wing organizations... " After Weitzman's testimony, "9/11" truth groups would have to be included in that list, and by extension any group or individual that the government defines as having "extremist beliefs" simply because of taking a position not in agreement with the corporate-governmental Establishment.
Jessica Lee quotes David Price, a professor of anthropology at St. Martin's University who studies harassment of dissident scholars: "This bill is trying to bridge the gap between those with radical dissenting views and those who engage in violent acts. It's a form of prior restraint."
Inscribed in very large letters inside the Statue Chamber of the Jefferson Memorial is a quote from Thomas Jefferson, excerpted from his letter of September 23, 1800 to Dr. Benjamin Rush:
I HAVE SWORN UPON THE ALTAR OF GOD ETERNAL HOSTILITY AGAINST EVERY FORM OF TYRANNY OVER THE MIND OF MAN.
Open Letter to Rep. Jane Harman Re: Terrorism & the Internet, by "reprehensor"
link to www.democraticunderground.com
Jane Harman, RAND Corporation, and H.R. 1955, by "reprehensor" 11-23-07 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x71635
Extinguishing Liberty - Thinking for Yourself is Now a Crime, by Paul Craig Roberts 1-4-08 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20080104160134233
contribute to this article
contribute to this article
add comment to discussion
view discussion from this article