BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism

Subject: BS: More GWB and the Rise of American Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 14 Jan 07 - 11:59 AM

The original thread by this title having been closed, here's another one to capture scintillating dark tidbits on the path of betrayal, such as this excerpt from today's NY Times:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 13 — The Pentagon has been using a little-known power to obtain banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and others suspected of terrorism or espionage inside the United States, part of an aggressive expansion by the military into domestic intelligence gathering.


The C.I.A. has also been issuing what are known as national security letters to gain access to financial records from American companies, though it has done so only rarely, intelligence officials say.

Banks, credit card companies and other financial institutions receiving the letters usually have turned over documents voluntarily, allowing investigators to examine the financial assets and transactions of American military personnel and civilians, officials say.

The F.B.I., the lead agency on domestic counterterrorism and espionage, has issued thousands of national security letters since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, provoking criticism and court challenges from civil liberties advocates who see them as unjustified intrusions into Americans' private lives.

But it was not previously known, even to some senior counterterrorism officials, that the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency have been using their own "noncompulsory" versions of the letters. Congress has rejected several attempts by the two agencies since 2001 for authority to issue mandatory letters, in part because of concerns about the dangers of expanding their role in domestic spying. ...

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 Jan 07 - 01:56 PM

And, unbeknownst to the rest of us, they have been opening our mail at will- wherever they perceive us as being a potential threat.

Makes me wonder if or when the time comes that we MUST revolt how many of our proposed plans and ideas would be silently monitored.

We need a different administration, at the very least. Actually, we desperately need a 'Loss of Confidence' capability.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 08:15 AM

Why bother? with a 'first past the post' voting system, you only have 2 political parties to get and keep 'corrupted', and since they have 'taken turns' for the last oh, ages, if there WERE any conspiracy, only a real fool would not have 'bought' both parties.

Ever notice how BOTH parties attack and do their best to destroy ANY candidate who is 'independent' or of a 'new party'?

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: JeremyC
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 09:38 AM

Sshh, they're reading what you're saying RIGHT NOW! Do you want to get 'detained' or something?

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 04:58 PM

The lack of responses to this thread illustrates the confines of political thought in both the US and UK.

Basically most people don't want to be bothered contemplating any alternative to the "one party system"
Most believe and will continue to believe that "progress" and economic prosperity are what they are portrayed to be by the politicians.
During my lifetime, I believe we have regressed not progressed politically...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 05:13 PM

I agree. We have regressed tremendously. All the mainstream political parties have been bought out by the same huge financial interests, and they cannot be expected to responsibly represent the public. Any smaller parties are rendered ineffective by the fact that those same huge financial interests own the mass media, which have become an outlet for a mixture of empty entertainment and manipulative propaganda.

Our electoral system as it stands is basically a fraud. It's better than no electoral system, but not much.

Many of the prophecies contained in books like "Brave New World" and "1984" have come true...but in a different manner than presented in those books. They have been accomplished not through a dour Stalin-like socialist monolithic government and system, but through a corporate-controlled multi-party system and flashy mass marketing of consumer goods.

Very clever. And much more effective than the grim and boring Stalinist approach. The monkey in the cage will not even notice he's in a cage if you give him enough toys, drugs, and entertainment. The entertainment, by the way, is mostly based around gratuitous images of sex, partying, and extreme violence. This does not assist in building a psychologically healthy society.

More than anything else, it resembles the declining days of the Roman Empire.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 06:57 PM

And THAT illustrates why LH is one of the most perceptive and original posters on Mudcat ....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 07:50 PM

I dunno. While I appreciate some of the similarities, I'd say human nature has not grown that much and we should not be surprised at the endless repetition of certain patterns in our species' numb-nutted limbic antics. Aside from those, I'd say our present period has to be faced for its own evils and in its own moment. Because our networks have so multiplied and accelerated and our technologies of force so magnified, it is a lot more unsettling, I think, than the worst prognostications of Olde Rome.


A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 07:53 PM

Well, yes, it is worse. The Romans did not yet have the ability to ruin the entire ecology of the world. We do.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Peace
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 07:59 PM

Once upon a time in the Sahara Forest . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 08:14 PM

Well, that's what they called it then...


A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: GUEST,Ahmabig Bu
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 08:37 PM

I respectfully disagree on the regression thing. Because of the internet, the cannon fodder is becoming self-aware. The only way the power elite can now stop an uprising of humanity is to bomb us all back into the stoneage. They're willing to do it, but I think they've lost their window of opportunity. They should have disarmed America decades ago. As it is now, Americans have had too long a look at the arrogance and disregard for human life by the likes of the Bushes and Clintons. We can't ever go back. These monsters are history. They will be pulled down and ground into the dust of history. Just a matter of time.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 08:42 PM

I hope you're right.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 09:42 PM

I hope that when they do fall, their voyage into history is a bit more compassionate than they were.

A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Slag
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 10:09 PM

Don't forget "Little Pogo". "We have met the Enemy, and they is Us!" or words to that effect. We all belong to something. We are NOT independent creatures no matter how much we would like to believe otherwise. I've harped on this theme in other threads but it's still true. I Winter, the lone wolf dies.

Is it the race of Man that is defective or just the defectives in the race of Man that perpetuate the problem(s) micro to macro? If you are going to effect change, how may that change be corrupted or misused? How do you get inside of the mind of the corrupted or worse, the corruptors without being corrupted yourself? It's daunting. And especially when you understand how like sheep most people are. They DON'T want to think. They just want their little patch and not have to be concerned with anything else. And they are SO easily lead, either to the shearer or the slaughter, it matters not which. God help us all. We are part of something, but WHAT?

"Be ware, when you say you stand, lest you fall."

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: GUEST,Peter Woodruff
Date: 15 Jan 07 - 10:09 PM

Ahhh...the betrayal of silence is defening...

Peter

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 16 Jan 07 - 04:11 AM

At the close of the last session, Congress passed a finance bill into which one Senator had inserted a five-word change to the UCMJ, giving military courts the authority to try civilians working in "undeclared conflict areas."

Brief description at Military trials for civilians? (Washington Post). Numerous other comments are up on the web.

"At least theoretically, contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan have been subject to criminal law in the United States through the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, known as MEJA. That law, passed in 2000, is supposed to expand federal prosecutors' authority to foreign battlefields. But MEJA has yet to be used to prosecute contractors."

"Allegations of contractor involvement in detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib were referred to federal prosecutors in 2004, but there have been no indictments. Late last year, two former employees of a private security firm in Iraq filed suit, alleging that a superior had shot at civilians without provocation. There, too, no charges have been filed. There have also been several unconfirmed reports of contractors firing at U.S. forces.

""Not one contractor of the entire military industry in Iraq has been charged with any crime over the last 3 and a half years, let alone prosecuted or punished," Singer wrote. "Given the raw number of contractors, let alone the incidents we know about, it boggles the mind.""

While allowing military courts to prosecute, the jurisdiction of the military courts would appear as an ex post facto risk for any "crimes" committed prior to the effective date of this law, and if anything lessens the likelihood of prosecution under MEJA. This new quirk is intended to appear as an effort to increase prosecution, but appears as an effort to muddy jurisdiction so as to protect the guilty - to me at least.

Exactly what the "military courts" can do is seriously muddied by inaccessibility of the applicable documents. The "Law" as enacted by Congress is almost entirely included in the "Uniform Code of Military Justice" (UCMJ) [TITLE 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 47 of US Federal Regulations.] That part of it is fairly easy to come by, for example at UCMJ. Note the link at the top of the page for "Amendments" which do not currently include this latest one.

The effect and application of this rather brief bit of lawmaking is left "to the President" who, as Commander In Chief, is responsible for incorporating "the details," principally in the "Manual for Courts Martial" which is a book that is required to be in the possession of, or immediately accessible to, every commissioned officer in the US military. "The book" however is infrequently republished, and is subject to changes by "executive orders" issued by the Prez. The last Executive Order (eo13387_mcm05amend.pdf) I found a couple of months ago was 20 pages of "replace paragraph 99.7.342.5.a with "whatever the Prez says,"" illegible and incomprehensible without a copy of the then current "book."

A new MCM is "available" at Manuals for Courts Martial where the 2005 MCM probably incorporates at least through that EO, but it's a 55.3 MB download, and my dial-up connection has "failed before finish" on 3 consecutive attempts (after about 3 to 5 hours per attempt).

Replacing civilian courts with "emergency military courts" is one of the first things Hitler and his thugs did too - so I'm "guardedly suspicious" here.

John

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 09:28 PM

From a correspondent, another gruesome reminder of what Georgie hath wrought:


http://baltimorechronicle.com/2007/011907Parry.shtml


In one of the most chilling public statements ever made by a U.S.
Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales questioned whether the U.S.
Constitution grants habeas corpus rights of a fair trial to every
American.


Responding to questions from Sen. Arlen Specter at a Senate Judiciary
Committee hearing on Jan. 18, Gonzales argued that the Constitution
doesn't explicitly bestow habeas corpus rights; it merely says when
the so-called Great Writ can be suspended.
"There is no expressed grant of habeas in the Constitution; there's a
prohibition against taking it away," Gonzales said.
Gonzales's remark left Specter, the committee's ranking Republican,
stammering.
"Wait a minute," Specter interjected. "The Constitution says you
can't take it away except in case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn't
that mean you have the right of habeas corpus unless there's a
rebellion or invasion?"
Gonzales continued, "The Constitution doesn't say every individual in
the United States or citizen is hereby granted or assured the right
of habeas corpus. It doesn't say that. It simply says the right shall
not be suspended" except in cases of rebellion or invasion."

"You may be treading on your interdiction of violating common sense,"
Specter said.

While Gonzales's statement has a measure of quibbling precision to
it, his logic is troubling because it would suggest that many other
fundamental rights that Americans hold dear also don't exist because
the Constitution often spells out those rights in the negative.
For instance, the First Amendment declares that "Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the
press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

continued.....

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Bev and Jerry
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 02:24 AM

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."...Sinclair Lewis

Bev and Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 03:02 AM

"The federal investigation into Congressional corruption is approaching a crucial deadline and potential dead end. Feb. 15 is the last day on the job for United States Attorney Carol Lam of San Diego, the inquiry's dedicated prosecutor, who is being purged by the Bush administration.

Her investigation led to the imprisonment of former Representative Randy Cunningham, the California Republican who took millions of dollars in bribes in exchange for delivering lucrative government contracts. But just as Ms. Lam was digging into other possible wrongdoing, the White House decided to force her from office without explanation.

Ms. Lam has been investigating the dealings of Brent Wilkes, a private contractor and deep-pocketed political contributor who was designated co-conspirator No. 1 in the Cunningham case. Mr. Wilkes developed other cozy relationships. Among other avenues, the inquiry has been looking into rich government contracts secured by corporations and lobbyists with ties to Representative Jerry Lewis — the former appropriations chairman — and his staff. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Mr. Wilkes could be indicted before Ms. Lam leaves office. The question now is whether her successor, as yet unnamed, will pursue the inquiry with the same dedication or will quietly smother it.

The outlook isn't promising. The administration is defenestrating at least six other U.S. attorneys. Yet Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is refusing to provide Congress with details on these unmerited dismissals. He insists that there's no attempt to quash fresh Republican scandals and says only the "very best" will be named as replacements.

We are skeptical, especially since the White House's reported choice to replace Little Rock's federal attorney is a Republican operative close to Karl Rove. Congress must demand a clear explanation from Mr. Gonzales and the White House on why these prosecutors are being ousted. It must search out every shady aspect of this clearly politically motivated purge — with a particular eye on Feb. 15."

(Times editorial)

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 06:55 PM

Every time I have made the following comment I have been solidly slapped down by people on both sides of the political devide, with epithets applied ranging from naive to stupid. However, since so many are now making comments on two party politics similar to my own, expressed over a period of several years, here goes one final attempt.

What I see as the only workable democratic political system based on faithfully representing the PEOPLE of the USA, and of the UK is the following.

1. Each constituency to elect a representative from a list of candidates who have a proven track record of public service to the LOCAL population. Reasonable campaign funds from the public purse, the same amount for each candidate.

2. The representative elect to swear an oath of allegiance to HIS/HER CONSTITUENTS, and publically repudiate all affiliations to any party or corporate organisation or group.

3. The representative to be subject to an absolute committment to account for his actions to a jury of constituents, if and when there is evidence that he/she has broken any condition of rule 2, and if proven, be subject to instant dismissal and replacement.

4. The representatives to elect one of their number president (PM in the case of the UK) solely to chair the meetings of the government.

5. All national policy decisions, especially use of military force to be made by majority vote of the representatives.

6. An undertaking, on pain of criminal prosecution, not to accept, within a ten year period of leaving office, employment in any corporation which held government contracts during the period of tenure as a representative.

7. A decent severance package to be standard on completion of the term of office, if not re-elected, tho' I think the good ones would be re-elected for sure.


IMHO, the needs and requirements of citizens are pretty much the same in almost all constituencies, and if they are paramount in the thinking of men who do not want to find themselves suddenly on the dole, the chances of corruption are at least considerably reduced.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Peter T.
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 04:26 PM

That Gonzales quote is the most shameful thing I have read in a very, very long time. Surely he must be censured by the American Bar Association for something like this. It is hard to believe anyone could say anything so completely appalling in a democratic society ruled by laws and not by men (as the saying goes).

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: bubblyrat
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 05:46 PM

Today, a British Daily Newspaper,The Daily Mail, has come out and openly referred to the Labour Party government as "The Fascist Left", which is exactly what they have become !! There will have to be a revolution soon, before it"s too late.This government has gone too far with its erosion of civil liberties,its highly intrusive and paranoid surveillance measures,and its signal failure to take ANY notice at all of the British Public and their needs and wishes.Of course , it"s going to be a lot harder over here,as successive governments ,since 1922,have made it virtually impossible for any individual to own a firearm of ANY sort.In fact,if we use any kind of force to defend ourselves against an assailant,the Fascist police will immediately arrest us for violating our attacker"s "Human Rights " !!! It sounds like a sick joke, but it"s TRUE !! We in Britain are DESPERATE-----We need support,we need weapons,we need leaders,we need training,We MUST get rid of these Traitors who have sold our country down the river,permitted UNRESTRICTED immigration,openly allowed Muslim Terrorists to preach religious hatred against us on the streets of London,and failed UTTERLY to deal with the ever increasing levels of violent crime on our streets.Ninety percent of the population are too terrified to go out at night for fear of being robbed or killed by the scum that inhabits the dark doorways of our filthy streets,while our ineffectual,politically correct Police are too scared to venture outside of their offices. I am not paranoid,and I"m not being alarmist--We are in SERIOUS trouble over here,and we need an ally !!
It"s alright for you Americans,you are all armed and you have the leadership,but we Brits are in a hell of a mess !!!

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 08 May 07 - 07:29 PM

erizon says phone record disclosure is protected free speech

By Nate Anderson | Published: May 07, 2007 - 01:48PM CT

Verizon is one of the phone companies currently being sued over its
alleged disclosure of customer phone records to the NSA. In a response
to the court last week, the company asked for the entire consolidated
case against it to be thrown out - on free speech grounds.

The response also alleges that the case should be thrown out because
even looking into the issue could violate state secrets, of course, but
a much longer section of the response tries to make the case that
Verizon has a First Amendment right to "petition" the government. "Based
on plaintiffs' own allegations, defendants' right to communicate such
information to the government is fully protected by the Free Speech and
Petition Clauses of the First Amendment," argue Verizon's lawyers.

Essentially, the argument is that turning over truthful information to
the government is free speech, and the EFF and ACLU can't do anything
about it. In fact, Verizon basically argues that the entire lawsuit is a
giant SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suit, and
that the case is an attempt to deter the company from exercising its
First Amendment right to turn over customer calling information to
government security services.

"Communicating facts to the government is protected petitioning
activity," says the response, even when the communication of those facts
would normally be illegal or would violate a company's owner promises to
its customers. Verizon argues that, if the EFF and other groups have
concerns about customer call records, the only proper remedy "is to
impose restrictions on the government, not on the speaker's right to
communicate."

With all of the phone company cases consolidated into one master case,
Verizon is hoping to have the case thrown out on free-speech grounds,
putting an end to its legal troubles over the issue. Should it fail, the
Bush administration is already preparing to ask Congress for retroactive
immunity for all telecommunications companies that assisted the
government after September 11, 2001. The government is also fighting
hard in court on behalf of the phone companies, filing repeated briefs
which claim that "state secrets" trump even the legality of the alleged
security programs.

---

I am curious to know whether anyone sees a logical flaw in the argument that a corporation is exercising its right to free speech by turning over phone records of citizens to the government's National Security Administration.

If a corporation is a legal entity, granted a virtual sort of personhood, then of course it enjoys the protections of the Consittution. So this makes perfect sense, doesn't it? Well, doesn't it?

Let's see who sees the creeping fascism in this wonderful inversion by means of which free speech = government control of speech.

A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Mrrzy
Date: 08 May 07 - 07:36 PM

Listen to the BBC - we are the bad example now, with China and whoever else is being less than what others would like... we used to be the GOOD example... *sigh* I miss the old America.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: dianavan
Date: 08 May 07 - 07:37 PM

Free speech is one thing; right to privacy another.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 08 May 07 - 08:23 PM

Well, speech is not exactly free when you know it can be turned over to the NSA. Especially in conjunction with Bush's insistence on the right to wiretap anyone anywhen.

It is shameful, in my view, that a corporation can take the position that because the facts of its records are true, their privacy may be breached without so much as notification. It is profoundly anti-constitutional, while glibly invoking the Constitution as rationalization.

A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Peace
Date: 08 May 07 - 08:59 PM

Gonzales has his supporters on Mudcat. Now, THAT is scary!

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 07 - 05:38 PM

Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/
flying_into_data_hell/

US demands air passengers ask its permission to fly
By Wendy M. Grossman
Published Friday 12th October 2007 13:18 GMT

"Under new rules proposed by the Transport Security Administration (PDF) (TSA)
all airline passengers would need advance permission before
flying into, through, or over the United States regardless of
citizenship or the airline's national origin.

Currently, the Advanced Passenger Information System, operated by the
Customs and Border Patrol, requires airlines to forward a list of
passenger information no later than 15 minutes before flights from
the US take off (international flights bound for the US have until 15
minutes after take-off). Planes are diverted if a passenger on board
is on the no-fly list.

The new rules mean this information must be submitted 72 hours before
departure. Only those given clearance will get a boarding pass. The
TSA estimates that 90 to 93 per cent of all travel reservations are
final by then.

The proposed rules require the following information for each
passenger: full name, sex, date of birth, and redress number
(assigned to passengers who use the Travel Redress Inquiry Program
because they have been mistakenly placed on the no-fly list), and
known traveller number (once there is a programme in place for
registering known travellers whose backgrounds have been checked).
Non-travellers entering secure areas, such as parents escorting
children, will also need clearance."

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Oct 07 - 10:15 PM

'"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."...Sinclair Lewis...'


                   Yeah, that's kind of the way it worked. And now we have political entities waving their fists in the air, screaming about Islamo-fascits.

                   Maybe it's just religion that's the problem here, regardless of the flavor.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 30 Oct 07 - 12:10 AM

A beautiful and interesting essay by Studs Terkel, called "The Wiretap This Time", reviews the history of authoritarian extremes in America.

Recommended.


An excerpt:

"...n 1978, with broad public support, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which placed national security investigations, including wiretapping, under a system of warrants approved by a special court. The law was not perfect, but as a result of its enactment and a series of subsequent federal laws, a generation of Americans has come to adulthood protected by a legal structure and a social compact making clear that government will not engage in unbridled, dragnet seizure of electronic communications.

The Bush administration, however, tore apart that carefully devised legal structure and social compact. To make matters worse, after its intrusive programs were exposed, the White House and the Senate Intelligence Committee proposed a bill that legitimized blanket wiretapping without individual warrants. The legislation directly conflicts with the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, requiring the government to obtain a warrant before reading the e-mail messages or listening to the telephone calls of its citizens, and to state with particularity where it intends to search and what it expects to find...."

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Nov 07 - 08:13 PM

There is no express grant of life liberty or the pursuit of happiness in the Constitution either.

Yes I know thats not the point but to be completely candid there are several right wing think tanks currently engaged in creating new language and arguements toward the elimination of the current US Constitution.

They are calling for the certain eventuallity of a national referendum to scrap the old and usher in a new Constitution that will be more user friendly....


to corporations.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Nov 07 - 08:19 PM

It isn't religion that's the problem, Rinslinger...it is political powermongers using religion for their own ends that is the problem.

You might say the same thing about bombs, armed forces, money, and guns. They are not a problem in themselves, they are a problem when put to improper use.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 07 Feb 08 - 09:32 AM

An excerpt from an OpEd News article of Feb 1 2008:

"The New Crime of Thinking
by Gary D. Barnett, February 1, 2008

It looks like the term "thought police" just might take on a whole new and real meaning. This depends on what happens in the U.S. Senate after receiving House bill H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This act (now S-1959 — Senate version) is now being considered by Senate committees and, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, will become law. Common sense would indicate that something this vague and dangerous would not make it out of committee, but considering that the House passed it on October 23 with 404 ayes, 6 nays, and 22 present/not voting, I'm not holding my breath.

The most disturbing aspects of this bill, and there are many, are the definitions noted in Section 899a. The three offenses defined in this document that will warrant prosecution are:

"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."

"Homegrown Terrorism: The term 'homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

"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."

Besides the fact that this Act would greatly expand an already monstrous bureaucracy (Homeland Security Act of 2002), it is on its very face a threat to all ideological thinking not approved by the state. Any citizen at any given time could be considered a terrorism suspect and accused or prosecuted for "bad" thoughts. Since the very act of thinking could now be considered a crime, how would the populace react to this new paradigm? Would political debate among the citizenry become more subdued? Would watch groups, whether police or private, arise to monitor individual and group conversations? Would speaking out and writing against the government become a dangerous activity?

The language contained in this proposed legislation is not only vague, it is also broad, sweeping, and unclear. The tenebrous and obscure nature of the above definitions is obviously not an accident. The broader the net, the more who are caught; the more who are caught, the more who live in fear of being caught. Ambiguity and fear are mighty deterrents, and ambiguity and fear foster obedience. In this case, unconditional obedience to the mighty state and its many dictates. ..."

---

I don't like arm-waving polemic, but the notion that a person can be prosecuted for "adopting or promoting an extremist belief system " is steering awfully close to the Big Brother nightmares of 1984.


A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 08 Feb 08 - 06:10 AM

"bombs, armed forces, money, and guns. They are not a problem in themselves, they are a problem when put to improper use"

....AH....but.... what is a 'PROPER USE'.... :-)


"process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change."
"use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."
"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."

Ah - just tell the religious right (the main source of support for this Bill) that this means that killing someone for performing abortions is a terrorist offence (and indeed most of the activities of many related groups...) and the Bill will vanish in a puff of smoke...

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Feb 08 - 07:26 AM

Bubblyrat, your post here is a shame to this thread, and your selection of the Daily Mail as a supporter or source of actual fact is worse.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Peace
Date: 08 Feb 08 - 09:23 AM

This is a good use for weapons of war, imo.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 09 Mar 08 - 11:44 PM

WASHINGTON Ñ President Bush quietly has claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant.

Bush asserted the new authority Dec. 20 after signing legislation that overhauls some postal regulations. He then issued a "signing statement" that declared his right to open mail under emergency conditions, contrary to existing law and contradicting the bill he had just signed, according to experts who have reviewed it.

A White House spokeswoman disputed claims that the move gives Bush any new powers, saying the Constitution allows such searches.

Still, the move, one year after The New York Times' disclosure of a secret program that allowed warrantless monitoring of Americans' phone calls and e-mail, caught Capitol Hill by surprise.

"Despite the president's statement that he may be able to circumvent a basic privacy protection, the new postal law continues to prohibit the government from snooping into people's mail without a warrant," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., the incoming House Government Reform Committee chairman, who co-sponsored the bill.

Experts said the new powers could be easily abused and used to vacuum up large amounts of mail.

"The [Bush] signing statement claims authority to open domestic mail without a warrant, and that would be new and quite alarming," said Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies in Washington.

"You have to be concerned," a senior U.S. official agreed. "It takes executive-branch authority beyond anything we've ever known."

A top Senate Intelligence Committee aide promised a review of Bush's move.

"It's something we're going to look into," the aide said.
advertising

Most of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act deals with mundane changes. But the legislation also explicitly reinforces protections of first-class mail from searches without a court's approval.

Yet, in his statement, Bush said he will "construe" an exception, "which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection in a manner consistent ... with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances."

Bush cited as examples the need to "protect human life and safety against hazardous materials and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."

White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore denied Bush was claiming new authority.

---

The alacrity with which he writes new laws is remarkable. The disregard he holds for previous laws even more so. This man is a danger to civilization.


A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Mar 08 - 12:00 AM

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

This is a perfect description of the current administration and its activities. Maybe we'll be able to put them in jail if this law gets passed.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: GUEST,coyote breath w/o cookie
Date: 10 Mar 08 - 04:57 PM

Ahh the idea of Bushnchaney extraordinarily renditioned to Gitmo for a little water boarding! Surf's up!

warms my heart, it does.

CB

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 10 Mar 08 - 05:05 PM

The United States has unilaterally cancelled a domain name in the .com TLD owned by a British citizen operating from Spain who ran a travel agency.

This arrogant unilateral politically-motivated action, based on the fact that the site sold trips to Cuba for Europeans and British citizens, without recourse or review, is another sample of the overweening pushiness of the current administration's world-view.


A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 26 Mar 08 - 12:26 PM

March 26, 2008 at 10:12:38

P.N.A.C. & Fascism & Bush

by G.E. Nordell, is an interesting, if slightly panic-stricken analysis of the encroachments against the Constitution, posse comitatus, and other cornerstones of the democratic republic and the founding document which, in part, informed them -- the imperial PNAC.

A

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Mar 08 - 01:18 PM

From the link:

"Congress has already issued subpoenas for Harriet Meiers, Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzales and others; failure to appear will result in votes for 'inherent contempt of Congress', which will put them in jail. The impeachment of Rove and Gonzales and Bush and Cheney and Rice will lead to a critical confrontation between the three branches of government."

Well, we already know that didn't work- Congress didn't pass the contempt of Congress vote.

This one may be true though: "The year 2008 is certain to be a long and hot campaign year."

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 08 - 01:42 PM

A "proper use" of military weapons, Foolestroupe, is the use of them to resist any foreign aggressor who is deliberately attacking, invading, and/or occupying one's own homeland (or ships, etc).

Such genuine self-defence is the natural right of any nation or community, and that has been understood ever since the most primitive days of human development. Animals who are territorial also understand the concept quite well.

An improper use of military weapons is to use them in a first strike of one's own free choosing on someone who has NOT attacked one's homeland (or ships, etc).

Aggression is improper. Self-defence is proper.

Supposed self-defence that is totally out of proportion to a perceived "attack" is also improper...for example...the USA has spuriously used certain marine incidents (whether real or concocted) to justify launching wars in the past (like against Spain or in Vietnam). Those were not cases of legitimate self-defence, they were case of finding an insincere and flimsy excuse to do what you wanted to do in the first place anyway. That's really aggression masquerading as self-defence.

The Germans also did that sort of thing in regards to Poland in '39. They claimed that the Poles had attacked them first (with a border raid), which was an outright lie. The Germans themselves fabricated the border raid, using prisoners in Polish uniforms whom they shot dead.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Mar 08 - 03:07 PM

I note with interest that the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 cited above would leave the IRA or Sinn Fein more than a little exposed...

organisations that many Americans seemed happy to support so long as they only bombed the Irish and British.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Mar 08 - 03:58 PM

Who else have they bombed, Richard?

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Mar 08 - 11:03 PM

I don't see how the IRA would be motivated to bomb anyone other than the Brits and Protestants in Northern Ireland, have they?

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: fumblefingers
Date: 27 Mar 08 - 08:49 PM

Terrorists and criminals from all parts of the world should be able to expect complete privacy when it comes to conspiring via telephone, mail and email. They deserve a head start on the authorities. Activist judges do their part, but it simply isn't enough.

Then there is Joe Brie-Eater. He doesn't want to take a chance that the law will find out about all the pornsites he visits, particulaly the one with the poofters.

Good thing that evil GWB won't be in office this time next year. Surely Hillary or Obama will make all your dreams come true. It will be interesting to see what this BS forum looks like a year from now.

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Mar 08 - 09:11 PM

Maybe we'll get McCain!

Subject: RE: BS: More GWB and the Rise of Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 27 Mar 08 - 09:37 PM

Fumblefingers:

Aren't you just a piece of work, with your imaginary enemies and delusory situational justifications for your well-reasoned hatefulness.

The people who deserve privacy int heir correspomdence, email and phone conversations are the hardworking private citizens of this country. I am one, for example. And I insist that the tradition of respecting privacy of the private citizen be honored, and restored where the stupidity of leaders has compromised it. And before you even open your yap, no, I do not have a single goddamn thing to hide, except my irritation with small-minded right-wing reactionaries who feel completely comfortable deciding what is or is not right for other private citizens.

If the Bush administration was doing half its job, we would have tracked down a good many more of the criminals you are so concerned about, and brought them to the great bar of American justice. Instead, we spent our lives and our treasure on invading a foreign country of no real threat, dissipated our attention and threw the bar into the sewer.

Defending these idiocies is shameful, IMHO.


A