HOMEGROWN TERRORISM - TREATED MORE HARSHLY THAN INTERNATIONAL TERROR

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS? ON THEIR WAY OUT?

TO PROTECT  THE ADMINSTRATION RATHER THAN "WE THE PEOPLE"?
Acts or threats against researchers or really anyone should not be condoned but neither should the right to free speech be suppressed with a bunch of technical excuses.

AntiMullah complains about the brutal suppression of speech or even thought/opinion in Islamic Iran but so many pointers appear to presage the loss of so many - not just speech - freedoms in America as a bunch of political, radical czars, who have no checks and balances and report only to their Obama House master.

Not from Congress (tamely tolerating them) nor any confirmation by the Senate (horribly thuggish as it is under Harry Reid), who uses bribes to get votes to pass bills "we the people" by a large majorty do NOT wish imposed on us.

Bills which have in mind how to control, forbid or punish our ability to demonstrate or voice our opinions are already passed or in the works.

Gets confusing when you have to wonder who is the enemy. The Islamic regime Mullahs or our radical czars or increasingly thuggish and oppressive Congress and Senate.

And terrorists are no longer from Al Qaeda, fanatical Taleban, violent Pakistan or mass murderous Major Hasan Nidal but potentially American Mr. Joe Six Pack, who did a stint in the military, or has a bumper sticker voicing his opinion or VOTING for one of the OFFICIAL presidential candidates other than Oba-Hussein.

Wake up America! We are getting deeper and deeper in trouble with the suppressive mindsets of our government.

Remember to vote them ALL out of office, Federal, State or County at the first opportunity. Regardless of party affiliations.



Transcript:
Thankfully in America we still have the power to use our voice, to rally, to protest, and to gather peaceably on any issue. We have the right to a free press, and we have a patriotic duty to petition our government for a redress of grievances. However, according to some elected Representatives, lawyers, and think tanks, there are limitations to the first amendment. Introducing: The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act of 2007.
The bill defines homegrown terrorism as: "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 Statesto 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."
So what happened to this legislation? It passed in the House of Representatives by an overwhelming 404-6 vote, but widespread opposition forced the Senate to shelve the bill. As of June 1st, 2008, no vote was scheduled during the current legislative year. The good news is widespread opposition by the people prevented this bill from being passed in the Senate, proving that our voices can make a difference. And we can do it again!
Unfortunately, even though the bill got shelved, it doesn't mean that a similar bill can't go through. Furthermore, Senator Joe Lieberman, Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, has taken matters into his own hands by declaring homegrown terrorism a "grave menace," and has already taken action to make YouTube censor its content.
Individual states appear to be taking matters into their own hands regarding Homegrown Terrorism. In February of 2009, an internal report distributed to local law enforcement by the Missouri Information Analysis Center outlined certain criteria by which to identify potential militia members. This all sounds well and good, but it might not be what you expect.
If you or anybody you know support former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, or Bob Barr, then you could be classified as a radical militia member. In Missouri, your viewpoints, beliefs, or opinions can classify you as a potential criminal! This undermines the first amendment's power in giving us the freedom to hold and express our beliefs. Recently, the collective efforts of the people standing up for their rights have spurred Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin to take action.
Did you know that the broadened interpretation of what defines acts of terrorism now encompasses animal rights groups? On February 19th and 20th of this year, four animal rights activists were arrested and charged as terrorists for practicing their first amendment rights. They didn't blow up any buildings and they didn't destroy any property.
Although some may disagree with their method for exercising their free speech, they were charged as terrorists and now face ten years behind bars under the 2006 Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. The only actual allegation of criminal activity is the mention of an alleged forced entry or trespassing. Everything else is protected under our first amendment rights. The question is: are these animal rights activists being charged because they really are terrorists, or are they being charged because the "powers that be" want to instill fear, and set an example for the rest of the nation?
Unless we act now, the list of American citizens charged as terrorists will only grow longer. We must let our Representatives know that their job is to serve the best interests of the people-not the lobbyists, not the corporations, and not even the President. Protecting Americans does not entail stripping away our birth rights.