[News] Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act Means a Crackdown on Dissent

[Anti-Imperialist News]

Tuesday, November 20th, 2007
Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act Raises Fears 
of New Government Crackdown on Dissent
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/20/1458214

----------
A little-noticed anti-terrorism bill quietly 
making its through Congress is raising fears of a 
new affront on activism and constitutional 
rights. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown 
Terrorism Prevention Act was passed in an 
overwhelming 400 to six House vote last month. 
Critics say it could herald a new government 
crackdown on dissident activity under the guise 
of fighting terrorism. [includes rush transcript]

----------
A little-noticed anti-terrorism bill quietly 
making its through Congress is raising fears of a 
new affront on activism and constitutional 
rights. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown 
Terrorism Prevention Act was passed in an 
overwhelming 400 to six House vote last month. 
Critics say it could herald a new government 
crackdown on dissident activity and infiltration 
of universities under the guise of fighting 
terrorism. The bill would establish two 
government-appointed bodies to study, monitor and 
propose ways of curbing what it calls homegrown 
terrorism and extremism in the United States. The 
first body, a National Commission, would convene 
for eighteen months. A university-based "Center 
for Excellence" would follow, bringing together 
academic specialists to recommend laws and other measures.

Critics say the bill's definition of "extremism" 
and "terrorism" is too vague and its mandate even 
more broad. Under a false veil of expertise and 
independence, the government-appointed 
commissions could be used as ideological cover to push through harsher laws.

Following last month's approval in the House, the 
Senate version is expected to go before the Judiciary Committee this week.

    * Jessica Lee, reporter for the 
<http://www.indypendent.org>Indypendent, 
published by the <http://nyc.indymedia.org>NYC 
Indymedia Center. Her latest article is called 
"Bringing the War on Terrorism Home: Congress 
Considers How to 'Disrupt' Radical Movements in the United States"
    * Kamau Karl Franklin, Racial Justice Fellow 
at the NY-based <http://ccrjustice.org>Center for 
Constitutional Rights. He is also co-chair of the 
National Conference of Black Lawyers and serves 
on the Executive Committee of the National Lawyers Guild.
AMY GOODMAN: A little-noticed anti-terrorism 
bill, quietly making its way through Congress is 
raising fears of the new affront on activism and 
constitutional rights. The Violent Radicalization 
and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act was passed 
in an overwhelming 400-6 House vote last month. 
Critics say it could herald a new government 
crackdown on dissent and infiltration of 
universities under the guise of fighting 
terrorism. The bill would establish two 
government-appointed bodies to study, monitor, 
and propose ways of curbing what it calls 
homegrown terrorism and extremism in the United 
States. The first body, a national commission, 
would convene for 18 months. The university-based 
"Center for Excellence" would follow, bringing 
together academic specialists to recommend laws 
and other measures. Critics say the definition of 
extremism and terrorism is too vague and its 
mandate even more broad. Under a false veil of 
expertise and independence, they say, the 
government-appointed commissions could be used as 
ideological cover to push through harsher laws. 
Following last month's approval in the House, the 
Senate version is expected to go before the 
Judiciary Committee this week. Two guests join us 
now in the Firehouse studio. Kamau Franklin is an 
attorney with the Center for Constitutional 
Rights. CCR has been closely following the 
measure. And Jessica Lee with us. She’s a 
journalist with the Indypendent, put out by the 
New York Indymedia Center. She has an extensive 
piece in the latest issue of the Indypendent. Its 
called "Bringing The War On Terrorism Home: 
Congress Considers How To 'Disrupt' Radical 
Movements In The United States." Jessica, let’s 
begin with you. Lay out what this bill is.

JESSICA LEE: Thank you for having me. When I 
first heard about this, I immediately did a 
Google news search and was alarmed to find that 
no media was talking about it whatsoever. So I 
looked into the bill and are two things that 
immediately jumped out of me. The first was that 
there is a broad use of definitions and the 
second is, who would they study? What does this 
mean? I would first like to point out the two 
definitions that many people I interviewed had 
problems with. And if you wouldnt mind me just 
reading them. The first is “violent 
radicalization”. This term means “the process of 
adapting or promoting an extremist belief system 
for the purpose of facilitating 
ideologically-based violence to advance 
political, religious, or social change”. Many 
people I interviewed were very concerned about 
this. The second definition, which is “homegrown 
terrorism”, talks about the planned use, 
threatened use, of force or violence by a group 
to intimidate or coerce the government of the 
United States. When you think about these 
definitions, what does that mean? When you look 
at the activism going on today, is there planned 
use of force or coercion going on? When you look 
at what is going on in Olympia, with individuals 
sitting down and blocking war shipments. When you 
look at Code Pink going into Congress and 
disrupting activities. Could this be included in 
this definition? And that’s what I went out to try to find my article.

AMY GOODMAN: Kamau Franklin, your concerns?

KAMAU FRANKLIN: Somewhere, as Jessica stated, the 
broad definitions allow for new laws that can be 
passed. that can basically equate social justice 
activism and civil disobedience to terrorism in 
some ways. So in the past if someone got charged 
for blocking the street, there were charged with 
disorderly conduct, or obstruction of 
governmental administration. Now, after this 
commission is done, if new laws are passed, with 
the broadness of the definitions, the Feds can 
now say “well, wait a minute, you threatened the 
use of violence or threatened the use of force. 
And that by itself can mean that we can now 
charge you with federal terrorist crimes because 
we do not agree with the type of demonstration 
that you were doing, we don’t agree with the 
point of view that you were having”. So its the 
broad based-ness, the breadth, the scope of the 
inquiry, which is really threatening for 
potential activists, people concerned with social 
justice issues and civil libertarians, something 
people should really be concerned about.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about the groups you see.

KAMAU KARL FRANKLIN: Well, I see groups as folks 
that are come out against the globalization, 
anti-globalization activists, social justice 
activists, animal rights activists. I think the 
breadth is [extounding] in terms of what can be 
covered. I dont think theres any limits placed on 
who can be targeted by this particular act. I 
think certain groups have already been singled 
out, like folks that are fighting against some of 
the globalization measures that are happening. 
And I think that is really going to be scary. 
Because The the sponsors of this bill are really 
targeting this sect more than targeting anything else.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about the groups, Jessica. In 
particular, you’ve mentioned, for example, 
Critical Mass, the cycling movement all over the country.

JESSICA LEE: Right. When I started to look into 
this bill, what I found was a great influence by 
the Rand Corporation, which is a government 
affiliated think tank. Twice, Brian Michael 
Jenkins, who is an expert on terrorism, gave 
testimony in the House on this bill.

AMY GOODMAN: He is from the Rand Corporation.

JESSICA LEE: He is from the Rand, yes. They 
largely tried to push this bill through on this 
idea there are these extreme political Islamists 
in our country and they did not do a very good 
job stating the actual threat. But when you look 
through the Rand Corporation's other reports in 
2005, they had a report called “Trends in 
Terrorism”. And they had one chapter called 
“Homegrown Terrorism Threats”. When you look in 
that chapter, there’s nothing about political 
Islamists. In fact, its all about anti- 
globalization people on the right and left side 
of the spectrum. The animal rights and the 
environmental movements; and anarchists. And to 
me I found that very interesting that that 
testimony was not mentioned at all when this bill 
was passed. That this legislation is not just 
gonna look at so-called violent, religious 
people, but also people who have been very strong 
opinions against this administration.

AMY GOODMAN: In terms of the Rand Corporation, it 
was Daniel Ellsburg who worked for the Rand 
Corporation, when he have that many thousands of 
pages on the history of the Vietnam war and the 
Pentagon papers. So Rand is the key -- what would 
you say, writer of the bill? And the 
Congressmember who’s most involved in this?

JESSICA LEE: Representative Jane Harmon, a 
Democrat from California, has had a lengthy 
relationship with the Rand Corporation. I called 
several times to get comment from the Rand 
Corporation, they said that their experts are out 
of town and unavailable due to the holidays. So I 
did not find out if they indeed did write the 
bill themselves. What we do know is that have a 
great influence and that they have had in the past.

KAMAU FRANKLIN: I just wanted to add to the Rand 
comment, particularly with Brian Michael Jenkins, 
supposed terrorist expert who’s mainly known 
according to Rand as someone who helped the 
United States in counter-insurgency measures in 
Vietnam, which is one of his claims to fame. In 
addition to that, he wrote a book and in his own 
book, I just want to quote that says "in their 
international campaign, the Jihadist will seek 
common ground with leftist, anti-American and 
anti-globalization forces who will in turn seek 
radical Islam comrades against a mutual foe." So 
I think what Jessica’s talking about, is that, 
the breadth of it is not focused in on supposed 
terrorists who are threatening the United States, 
but folks who have real concerns about where this 
country is heading, folks who express dissent in 
various different ways including demonstrations 
and marches. These are the folks who this bill potentially good target.

AMY GOODMAN: The Baltimore Sun has a column 
called "Here Comes the Thought Police."

KAMAU FRANKLIN: I think they’re saying “thought” 
because one of the important aspects of this 
bill, also, is to – it concentrates on the 
internet as a place where terrorist rhetoric or 
ideas have been coming across into the United 
States and to American citizens. If, once again, 
this bill reaches to become a law and that study 
is done, who is to say that now after the study 
is done, the recommendations wont get made to say 
“lets curb how the internet is being used, lets 
put filters on what gets to come into the 
country”. You spoke a little bit about al- 
Jazeera. Imagine after they take a look at this 
and how al-Jazeera is viewed, one particular area 
well say “let's stop that” – I mean they stopped 
that from coming in over a cable – but, “let’s 
stop that from coming from the internet”. That 
could be happening to thousands of web sites in the near future.

AMY GOODMAN: And local, federal cooperation among police, Kamau?

KAMAU FRANKLIN: Theres a New York study that was 
done that also was a basis for some of where this 
bill came from. These type of operations go 
hand-in-hand with of course, joint task force. So 
we truly would expect when they go around and 
seek out experts and they talk to folks that it 
would be talking to local police officials and 
looking for ways in which they can work together 
on this, where the local officials can seek 
federal funding and they will come out and try to 
use this and say “let's target these particular 
groups in our area that we know about”. Once 
again, no basis for terrorism, but “they’ve been 
dissenters, they have their internet sites reviewed and we dont like those”.

AMY GOODMAN: Jessica Lee, the Violent 
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention 
Act was passed in the house 400-6. That is a very big margin.

JESSICA LEE: Correct. It was actually passed 
under what is called the “Suspension of the 
Rules”, which is a provision the House uses to 
pass bills very quickly and these are usually 
bills deemed uncontroversial and do not need more 
debate. So we saw a quick vote. Six people voted 
against. One was presidential candidate Dennis 
Kucinich. He was unavailable for comment 
unfortunately. So what we're seeing not only the 
Republican congress giving the Bush 
administration swath of powers to confront the 
war on terrorism, but we are also seeing the 
democratically-led congress also extending these powers.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about the Center for Excellence.

JESSICA LEE: It would be one of the – there’s 
already eight in existence, under the Department 
of Homeland Securityg, and they’re based in 
universities, they bring scholars together from 
around the country, that are “experts” in a bunch 
of different fields to study a particular thing. 
This is someone who would want to study the 
moment in which somebody who is a radical or 
extremist will turn from being peaceful, having 
those beliefs which are protected under the First 
Amendment, to when they might become violent. I 
found it very interesting because if you want to 
study the moment in which somebody is going to 
turn violent, don't you need to study them before 
they turned violent? If so, aren’t you studying 
First Amendment beliefs? I talked to a couple of 
scholars who study this type of thing. One is 
Braun Taylor who has studied the radical 
environmental movement for about 15 years, and he 
says if you really want to understand this stuff, 
you have to go into the field, make human 
interactions, build trust, and you have to talk 
to them. It takes a long time. These people are 
very wary to talk to academics in the first 
place. So we are seeing the Center of Excellence 
that is supposed to bring people together to 
study these very people that are skeptical of 
academics. Another interesting thing, the 
national commission which has mandated to produce 
three reports, each six months apart. The first 
report is supposed to come out after six months. 
How in the world can they possibly study these 
very complex issues? They want to study the 
social, criminal, political, psychological and 
economic roots of terrorism. How are they 
supposed to study this in six months and come up 
with these recommendations, which in fact, are 
going to be used to prevent, disrupt and mitigate 
domestic terrorism in six months?

AMY GOODMAN: Kamau Franklin, Center for 
Constitutional Rights, what are you doing about this?

KAMAU FRANKLIN: On our website, we have a lot 
more information about what this bill is. In 
fact, we have the different versions for people 
to start to view. We’re gonna call for some 
actions in the next couple of weeks. We probably 
agree that at this stage the Senate is also going 
to pass their version of the bill. What is really 
going to happen, where the fight’s really gonna 
start to take place is in the forming of this 
commission, watching this commission, responding 
to its inquiries. In fact, doing demonstrations 
against this commission. We think that is where 
the real fight will be now is in the grassroots 
who are gonna have to come out and really talk 
about how they think this commission will not 
really study terrorism but will study them. We 
want to provide as much information as we can on 
who should be the target of some of this work 
that will have to be done. So when people go to 
the website ccrjustice.org, they’ll start to find 
this information. In the next couple of weeks, 
we’ll rally start to target and hone in on who should be thought about.

AMY GOODMAN: Kamau Karl Franklin, Center for 
Constitutional Rights and Jessica Lee, journalist 
for the Indypendent. Thank you for being with us. 
This is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war 
and peace report. I'm amy Goodman. When we come 
back, I will be joined by Marcel Khalife the Marcel.




Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20071120/38f2b212/attachment.htm>