http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7439

Bringing the War on Terrorism Home: Congress Considers How to 'Disrupt' Radical Movements in the United States

Under the guise of a bill that calls for the study of "homegrown terrorism," Congress is apparently trying to broaden the definition of terrorism to encompass both First Amendment political activity and traditional forms of protest such as nonviolent civil disobedience, according to civil liberties advocates, scholars and historians.

The proposed law, The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R. 1955), was passed by the House of Representative in a 404-6 vote Oct. 23. (The Senate is currently considering a companion bill, S. 1959.) The act would establish a "National Commission on the prevention of violent radicalization and ideologically based violence" and a university-based "Center for Excellence" to “examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism and ideologically based violence in the United States" in order to develop policy for "prevention, disruption and mitigation."

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. There is concern, too, that the bill will undermine academic integrity and is the latest salvo in a decade-long government grab for power at the expense of civil liberties.

David Price, a professor of anthropology at St. Martin's University who studies government surveillance and harassment of dissident scholars, says the bill "is a shot over the bow of environmental activists, animal-rights activists, anti-globalization activists and scholars who are working in the Middle East who have views that go against the administration." Price says some right-wing outfits such as gun clubs are also threatened because "[they] would be looked at with suspicion under the bill."

The Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC), which has been organizing against post-Sept. 11 legislative attacks on First Amendment rights, is critical of the bill. "When you first look at this bill, it might seem harmless because it is about the development of a commission to do a study," explained Hope Marston, a regional organizer with BORDC.

"However, when you realize the focus of the study is 'homegrown terrorism,' it raises red flags," Marston said. "When you consider that the government has wiretapped our phone calls and emails, spied on religious and political groups and has done extensive data mining of our daily records, it is worrisome of what might be done with the study. I am concerned that there appears to be an inclination to study religious and political groups to ultimately try to find subversion. This would violate our First Amendment rights to free speech and freedoms of religion and association."

One pressing concern is definitions contained in the bill. For example, "violent radicalization" is defined 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."

Alejandro Queral, executive director of the Northwest Constitutional Rights Center, asks, "What is an extremist belief system? Who defines this? These are broad definitions that encompass so much. ... It is criminalizing thought and ideology."

For her part, Marston takes issue with the definition of homegrown terrorism. "It is about the 'use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence to intimidate or coerce the government.' This is often the language that refers to political activity."...........

This bill represents an ongoing trend of the elites putting in place structures of law that will enable them to foist greater control on the common people. So will things proceed to a point where the mere act of expressing ideas, or ideologies that the facilitators ( ultimately the view of the elites ) of this bill would cite as " extremist views ", will find those expressing such views being marked as " Terrorist ", and therefore will find such persons being subject to sanctions that the current fabricated clasification of " Enemy Combatants " now enjoy as punishement, which is clearly no rights or due process whatsoever. Viewing this development along with other things occuring within the last year, like Bush's presidential directive of May 9th, which allows the executive the legal mechanism to assume total unchallenged power over all branchs of government upon the pronoucment of a " national emergency. Also recent large scale excersices were done involving preperations for how to implement Martial Law on a national scale. There has also been reports of the military having a program of late where they are working with religious leaders to have them talk to thier flocks about the concept that they should except what the government wants them to do, like in the case of a national emergency or Martial Law conditions, trying to create an atmosphere of greater compliance with stricter social conditions that would prevail under conditions such as Martial Law. There have been much discussion too of the many detention camp like facilities that are being made ready in the US by such large construction corportations such as Haliburton. Haliburton just recently moved its base of operations to Saudi Arabia, clearly to remove itself from the threats of a potential collapse of the US economy. Also there was legislation enacted earlier this year by this administration that would allow them to confiscate the " property " of those the deem as engaging in " actions " that would be seen as a threat to the agenda of this adminstration regarding thier military objectives in thier " War On Terror ". Again the finer points of the legislation are vague and ill-defined. I think these are all indications of the greater elites of the US and Europe, and of this administration of Bush ( under Chenny's control ) preperations for the coming storm of troubles, like Hydrocarbon depletion, the threat of impending worldwide economic depression or possible out right collapse, the added pressures on economies from growing climate disruptions, water scarcity issues, and the long list of ills that excessive population will precipitate in consideration of the world's finite resources. The elites will be doing all they can to maintain and even bolster thier wealth and position, and the ways they seek to do this will be adverse to the interest of the quality of life of the common people. The elites like the Bilderberg Group for example, are also now seeing that the growing crisis situations associated with excessive population are now realistically creating a hard to manage and threatening situation regarding the elites interest in maintaining control and power, and they are intensifying thier interest and efforts towards the agenda of population reduction. The means they are considering as remedies are in many cases covert, and downright sinister. As an example the mass deaths of wars and genocide are actually seen by these elites as a benificial development. Darfur is seen generally by most folks as a horrible situation of the fighting of indigenous people between themselves in horrible ways in Africa. Actually the Darfur region is rich in hydrocarbon energy. The elites are actually helping to covertly facilitate these conflicts because the resultant destabilized societies in the affected areas make for a situation where elite interest associated with energy can more easily move in to work with whatever warlords rule the roost to plunder the resources for western economies and to add to elite riches. The warlords having no moral qualms about the condition of the destitute masses are more than happy to work with outsiders who will pay them handsome royalties for the privilage of the elites sought plundering as they gain access to these precious resorces. The world sees the facade of a local genocide, when it is actually behind the scenes a facilitated catastrope. Of course as with all thing there are also other factors associated with the situation, like the devastating effects of climate change on the Darfur region. As the western elites ( the US and Europe ) are intensely pursueing objectives of trying to control energy resources to enable them to achieve a dominent position regarding the world's infrastructure and resources, a counter to this is developing strongly now as seen by the growing cooperation of Russia, China, many south american countries like Venezuala, Iran etc. Its all adding up to the potential for increasingly tense confrontation over diminishing resources, and especially in view that energy availability looks poised for an imminent decline, with no realistic alternative energy schemes looking likely to be able to match the rates of hydrocarbon energy declines. We are truly living in very interesting, and also very dangerous times.