Homegrown? Overblown (Palm Beach Post re: Liberty City 7)

[struggle4progress]

Palm Beach Post Editorial
Friday, April 18, 2008

It began as the case of the Miami 7. Then it was the Miami 6. But the numbers that matter are 2 - as in the number of trials - and 0 - as in the number of convictions.

.... "Left unchecked," Mr. Gonzales warned, "these homegrown terrorists may prove to be as dangerous as groups like Al-Qaeda."

In fact, the Miami 7 apparently were as dangerous as sea lice. They had no bombs or weapons to carry out this plot. They pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda only at the urging of an FBI informant. In December, a federal jury deadlocked on charges against six and acquitted one. On Tuesday, another jury failed to reach a verdict.

The government now must decide whether to try the men again. That should be an easy decision. At this point, the prosecutors look like bigger clowns than the defendants. Obviously, the danger of domestic terrorism is real. Just as obviously, the Bush administration picks and hypes the wrong cases. No wonder Mr. Gonzales is having trouble finding a job on his own. Left unchecked, incompetence may prove to be as dangerous as those who want to harm the country.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2008/04/18/m20a_miami6_edit_0418.html

[angrycarpenter]

1. This was a clear attempt to

implicate Americas black muslim community in the war on terror. I am so glad that it is blowing up in their faces. If we must fight a war on terror at least look at the real threat. Right-wing, bunker digging, gun hoarding, apocalypse wanting, Jesus freaks.

[DinahMoeHum]

2. Another example of standing on a brick to kick a duck in the ass. . .

and Bush's feds STILL missed the mark.

Pathetic.

:evilfrown:

[flashl]

3. Mission Accomplished?

Thought Crime Bill

The aptly nicknamed "Thought Crime Bill", H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, was easily passed in the House last October 23 with a vote of 404-6, with 22 reps not present. Sponsored by California democrat Jane Harman, H.R. 1955 has since been read by Congress twice and was then referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Presumably, it is now being streamlined and fitted for mass consumption.

The shamelessly gratuitous title that graces this bill is befitting of the times, and at once beckons an Orwellian knee-jerk reaction, preceding even the actual reading of the bill. Though the title might lead one to immediately pass judgement on it, the fact that it was so warmly received in the House restores a little hope that the title is misleading. I certainly wouldn't expect the folks responsible for allocating our tax money to still buy into this whole terror business. They are supposed to be chosen based on their qualifications and merits. Propagating and maintaining a state of fear and using it to enforce tyrannical measures is not really the kind of quality I am looking for in representation. Lets dive into this bad boy and see if the title is just misleading in order to get our attention.

First and foremost, it seeks to establish a commission on the prevention of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. Another work group paid for by taxpayers to investigate taxpayers. Next, it defines 'violent radicalization': The term 'Violent Radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facillitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious or social change. Ok, so the problem here is that "extremist" is left vague and could mean just about anything, relative to some other thing. However, it seems that if this undefined extremist belief system does not facillitate violence, it is in the clear.

Next, 'homegrown terrorism' is defined: The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. Seems pretty straightforward here, though, one might wonder at what point an idea becomes a plan and at what point a suggestion becomes a threat.

Finally, 'ideologically based violence' is defined: 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. The same questions apply here with respect to plans and threats.

Ol' 1955 then goes on to outline details such as committee assignments, compensation packages and so on. It also plans to establish a Center of Excellence for the study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism, to be developed in a designated university and in cooperation with Federal, State, local and tribal homeland security officals. The bill itself is very short and fails to go into extensive detail concerning technicalities and operational techniques. The concern lies in the loose language of the definition of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. It is these loose definitions that warrant the nickname. The previous wholesale abuses in intelligence and secruity departments under the War on Terror do not lend to a benefit of the doubt scenario with this little ditty of legislation, and it could all too easily be interpreted to further circumvent our individual liberties.

I have already written my congressman about my concerns with this bill. I hope I have encouraged at least one reader to do the same.

The Recent Times

And, #7 didn't dodge the bullet, he is facing deportation.