Search this page for:
 
.
Internet Attacked as Tool of Terror
.
 

by: Matt Renner, t r u t h o u t | Report

 

    A controversial plan to study and profile domestic terrorism was scrapped after popular push back, however, the spirit of the legislation lives on in Senator Joe Lieberman's office.

    HR 1955, "The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" passed the House in October 2007 with almost unanimous support. The bill immediately came under fire from civil liberties watchdogs because of what many saw as a deliberate targeting of Muslims and Arabs and the possible chilling effect it might have on free speech.

    The original bill intended to set up a government commission to investigate the supposed threat of domestically produced terrorists and the ideologies that underpin their radicalization. The ten-member commission was to be empowered to "hold hearings and sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, and administer such oaths as the Commission considers advisable to carry out its duties." The bill also singled out the Internet as a vehicle for terrorists to spread their ideology with the intention of recruiting and training new terrorists.

    After significant public pressure, the bill stalled in the Senate. However, Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut), the current chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, has embraced the thrust of the legislation and has been working to push forward some of the goals of the original bill, including an attempt to weed out terrorist propaganda from the Internet.

    Jim Dempsey, vice president for public policy at the non-profit Center for Democracy and Technology has spoken out against the assault on Internet speech. "I have more concern about what Senator Lieberman is doing than about HR 1955. [Lieberman] is no friend of civil liberties," Dempsey told Truthout, adding "there is concern that what he has planned will be worse than HR 1955."

    Dempsey spoke out in favor of the spirit of HR 1955, calling the outpouring of criticism "hypothetical and hyperbolic." In his view, the study of radicalization and home grown ideologically based violence is worthwhile. However, he objects to recent actions taken by Lieberman.

    On May 19, Lieberman sent a letter to Google Inc.'s CEO Eric Schmidt demanding that Google "immediately remove content produced by Islamist terrorist organizations from YouTube."

    "By taking action to curtail the use of YouTube to disseminate the goals and methods of those who wish to kill innocent civilians, Google will make a singularly important contribution to this important national effort," Lieberman wrote.

    Google fired back, refusing to take off material that did not violate its community guidelines. "While we respect and understand his views, YouTube encourages free speech and defends everyone's right to express unpopular points of view," Schmidt said in response, adding, "we believe that YouTube is a richer and more relevant platform for users precisely because it hosts a diverse range of views, and rather than stifle debate, we allow our users to view all acceptable content and make up their own minds."

    Google removed some of the videos that violated their rules against posting violence and hate speech, but made a point to write, "most of the videos, which did not contain violent or hate speech content, were not removed because they do not violate our Community Guidelines."

    "I think that Senator Lieberman's actions vis-a-vis Google were improper," Dempsey said. "A blame the messenger approach doesn't make sense as a response to radical violence. The notion that taking the videos off of YouTube will accomplish anything shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the Internet. Take the videos off of YouTube and they'll appear elsewhere."

    Senator Lieberman's staff failed to return calls for comment.

    A New York Times editorial called Lieberman's claims about the Internet "ludicrous," and warned of an attempt to censor the Internet. Lieberman defended himself in a response letter, saying, "the peril here is not to legitimate dissent but to our fundamental right of self-defense."

    According to civil liberties activists, Chairman Lieberman has been spearheading an effort to censor speech on the Internet. His committee recently released a report titled "Violent Islamist Extremism, The Internet, And The Home Grown Terrorism Threat," (PDF) a report detailing the use of web sites and Internet tools to spread pro-terrorism propaganda.

    The report repeatedly blames Internet web sites and chat rooms for "radicalization," calling the web sites "portals" through which potential terrorists can "participate in the global violent Islamist movement and recruit others to their cause." As civil liberties groups have pointed out, the report focuses solely on terrorism seen as associated with Islam.

    Also, the report relies heavily on experts from inside the US national security apparatus, with only one research study cited. The study by the New York Police Department details a hypothetical four step "radicalization process". The report was criticized by a coalition of civil liberties groups as "statistically and methodologically flawed," in a letter they wrote in response to the report.

    Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington, DC, legislative office, said that Lieberman "is trying to decide what he thinks should go on the Internet," which, she said, "reeks of an interest in censoring all sorts of different dialogs."

    "If someone criticizes Israel's treatment of Palestinians and favors Hamas, should that be censored?" Fredrickson asked.

»

Matt Renner is an editor and Washington reporter for Truthout.

Comments

lots of tracks to cover and

lots of tracks to cover and sensor out.. 911 tianemen bush years palestine lebanon south amer list goes on.........

This is psychological

This is psychological warfare on EVERYONE! Ignore it.

Look at Lieberman's history

Look at Lieberman's history to connect the dots. Graduated Yale 1965, Yale Law 1968. This ought to give anyone pause when the good Senator from Connecticut begins to limit First Amendment rights. When the limit is placed on one person's right to speak (or type) it is limited on all. The Scull and Bones crowd has done everything in their power to whittle away at our freedoms and consolidate their power base over the last several years.

Has anyone else actually

Has anyone else actually read HR 1955 or S1959? Far worse than the possible attacks on Muslims, the bill allows Bush to call anyone a homegrown terrorist (i.e., YOU) and disappear them and torture them in Guantanamao. What the Hell is a 'homegrown terrorist?' Well, much of the debate on the bill (none of which debate occurred in the House before they voted it in by name only, like the Patriot Act) is about the definition of the word 'violence', because Homegrown Terrorists are those who either commit or plan to commit violence in this country. Well violence is bad, right? However, reading the bill more carefully one actually finds violence defined: The purposeful destructionn of property (ok), persons (ok) or PROFITS. This means simply PLANNING to picket at your local WalMart makes you a Homegrown Terrorist. And last, besides this thought crime portion, is a section describing basically what is called 'Garden Plot', which is that the ePresident may choose at any moment-- under condtion of war, SOCIAL UPRISING, catastrophe, etc OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCE (!!!!!!!) that he can take over all the corporations and take all of our civil liberties away, declare martial law, and put us in the detention camps which Halliburton or KBR is building for millions of dollars 'in case of a sudden flux of illegal immigration,' which are being built, for instance, in places in danger of immigration like Vermont. And Liebermann's version might be worse?? At least someone in the Senate read the bill so it hasn't been passed. You can't say that of the House, where HR1955 was passed 400-6. --See you in the detention centers!

he problem is that there are

he problem is that there are probably many members of congress who are just as self centered and who care for nothing but their own power. I feel that we the people will have to stand up and fight as our revolutionary forbears did for our rights and our independence from the government we now have.

Google is already censoring

Google is already censoring the InterNet! They are censoring it in China, at the request of the dictatorship in that country. To list only one example, in China, one cannot find on the InterNet any reference to the Tienanmen Sq. massacre. Google has deleted this history, at the request of the government. Every argument Google advances against Lieberman is an argument against what Google and the Communist government of China are doing at this moment!

It's a move by the

It's a move by the powers-that-be to stifle free speech on the internet. That way they can get back to misinforming you via the "liberal media" as they have always done - without those leftist blogs shooting down their lies.

Lieberman's project of using

Lieberman's project of using censorship to prevent bad ideologies from forming or spreading could not be more diametrically opposed to our core constitutional freedoms. Every day it becomes more evident that there is a silver lining in the dark cloud hanging over the 2000 presidential elections: thank God Joe Lieberman did not become vice president.

Apparently you missed this

Apparently you missed this story... http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/01/04/the-president-wants-to-open-your-mail/ Last month President Bush, in one of his infamous signing statements, claimed the authority to open Americans’ mail without a warrant to collect foreign intelligence or in “exigent circumstances.” PGOBrien wrote: The US Mail was a useful tool for recruiting, before the Internet. So is free association and the right to gather together to discuss and share our ideas. Should we allow our mail to be opened, and should we put cameras in our homes now, so no one can call a secret meeting and recruit people to Radical Islamic Fascism (which seems to be the only terrorism we're concerned about these days -- we are incredibly silly, sometimes).

>"If someone criticizes

>"If someone criticizes Israel's treatment of Palestinians and favors Hamas, should that be censored?" Fredrickson asked. I'd give even odds that that is specifically the variety of content that concerns Lieberman. Speculation aside, though, Lieberman's Senate site just put up a very interesting snippit: http://lieberman.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=298093 "No matter what their content, videos produced by terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda, that are committed to attacking America and killing Americans, should not be tolerated." This specifically states that Lieberman doesn't care what the content is, but that he's interested a total shutout of any speech whatsoever from specific groups that the administration deems unacceptable. We have never, ever, ever approached this kind of level of censorship, short of perhaps the promptly-deemed-unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts. Even during the McCarthy era, we didn't simply utterly silence any ideas or communication from communist groups. Personally, I feel that this sort of policy is more than a little alarming.

Yeah, Liebermans all about

Yeah, Liebermans all about preventing violence and terrorism. Thats why hes unfailingly and enthusiastically supported the mass murder of innocent Iraqi civilians by the US, and genocide and terrorism against Lebanon and the Palestian terroritories by Israel. In an honest objective ranking of the worlds worst and most dangerous terrorists, Lieberman is probably in the top 20 up there with Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Blair, Sharon, Bin Laden, Nasrallah and Olmert.

I think people are taking

I think people are taking this terrorist nonsense WAY to seriously. JT http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com

Lieberman received two

Lieberman received two deferments, one to attend college and law school at Yale, the second because he was married with a young child by the time he finished school in 1967. The deferments ensured that Lieberman would live --so he could vote to send younger men off to those other wars that he later supported. In the ONE conflict which he could have been sent to....Viet Nam....Lieberman was against that war. Lieberman has lived his 15 mintues of fame well beyond any reasonable limit because of the mathematics of the voting in the U.S. Senate. By some quirk of fate, he has played this rare position of being a swing vote and holds that over the entire Democratic Party. He considers himself the most powerful man in the universe right now because of the way Connecticut voters did in America. Lieberman is making it appear that he is currently serving in the U.S. military....he surrounds himself with big military officers all splattered with medals well earned. He defers to them at hearings like he was a private in the army. This is Joe's idea of being in the military which he didn't do when he surely had the chance. So he is in the business of being a tough talker and sending other parent's kids to conflicts he voted for. It makes him look "miliatary". How a true American hero like John McCain (though I don't agree with his well stated foreign policy views) would even let Joe Lieberman tag along with him is beyond the pale. Lieberman is a political whore of the first order. He is not worthy of carrying the luggage of a McCain or John Kerry or Al Gore.... There is no other description more apt for this person. There is no nice word to spin what this guy did to the Democratic Party in Connecticut and what he is doing to it right now nationally in the Senate. Had the DEMS had a 5 or 6 vote majority in the Senate, this little piece of work would be a man without a country. The GOP would not want to associate with this oppotunisitc loser and the DEMS would be hard at work getting rid of him. Chris Dodd is what good Connecticut Democrats are capable of producing and let's hope when given that chance , they'll do the right thing next time...AGAIN!!!!! Joe Lieberman can't sleep well at night knowing what he is and what he has done...and the disgusting photos of him show a man who is getting more deformed as the months go on. Scott McClellan finally came clean with himself and his country this week. Joe Lieberman does not have enough trace elements of personal character to ever become the hero McClellan has become.....or the existing American heroes such as Cindy Sheehan and Scott Ritter. Funny how in politics one lone guy or gal can do so much damage to the truth and to lies. Lieberman's is basking in his swing vote play toy in the U.S. Senate for the time being. He is lord god Lieberman and plays this anomaly to the hilt. In team sports, a guy like this would be singled out and hounded into oblivion. But there he is Joe....Joe playing his hand with money and support that he got from the Democratic Party over all those years......bluffing away until the day comes when his swing vote is meaningless. He is a bottle of nitro open to the air..he is gas stove that is leaking......he is a cannon ball rolling around the deck...he is the spoiled rotten kid who threatens to take the ball and leave if the other kids don't play by his rules.... He is the crazy guy in room full of people who everybody is afraid of fearing what he might do next if anybody upsets him. This is what Joe Lieberman relies on to keep his star brightly shining in the canopy of American political stars. Not ideas or inventiveness but the unspoken threat of "I can really f this up for you people if you don't do it MY way". Poor Chris Dodd....his fellow Senator from Connecticut is a fallen man in every sense of the word. A fallen man who thinks talking like a warrior somehow makes him one. Look yourself in the mirror, Joe. It is what we see out here and it ain't pretty. You have grown old and gone bad.

Free speech on the Internet

Free speech on the Internet must be defended fiercely. With the public mind being increasingly dominated by corporate media propaganda, independent Internet communication may well be the last hope for citizens to reform the United States.

Lieberman is a crook.

Lieberman is a crook. Everything he does seems to involve force or fraud. Of course he wants to dissolve the net. It exposed Israeli involvement in 911 and the inevitable COVERUPS.

I think we should put this

I think we should put this question directly to Lieberman: Many Americans believe the Bush regime carried out the attacks of 911. They believe congress is now complicit in covering up the crime. They believe that members of the Bush administration and members of congress should be prosecuted and punished by death for their crimes. does this fall under "legitimate dissent"?

LIE berman is not an

LIE berman is not an American patriot, but a fifth columnist serving his masters in Tel Aviv. If Joe Boy gets his "Thought Crime Act" pushed into law, look for widespread censorship of the Internet, with the excuse being to "protect the children" from the bad guys. You're not against protecting children, are you? LIE berman needs to pack his bags and return to his beloved Israel and stay. We have no need of his ilk in the US.

If you want to give the FBI

If you want to give the FBI and the NSA the power to eavesdrop on Americans without a warrant, why interfere with open communication on the internet? I would think these agencies would have an easier time finding threats to national security if those threats publicly identify themselves. Is Lieberman after results or political intimidation?

i'm inclined to agree with

i'm inclined to agree with the people who want to preserve the internet in a way that gives power to each individual to speak and demonstrate, and hear. other media --ways of getting information-- is very much controlled by money interests--- and is not accessible to everyone; in fact the more it is controlled by powerful interests, the more it concentrates their power. having search engines to find answers to questions has changed so much for us---where before you had to hoof it to the library or spend days and nights investigating on foot or phone just to even find the different sides of a story, now you can type your question into a box and get lots and lots of answers, each calibrated in different ways----this is so precious so worth every effort to preserve and every caution along the way. CB

I doubt that Lieberman, et

I doubt that Lieberman, et al, will be satisfied until they have all the power and we have no rights at all.

Of course the Internet can

Of course the Internet can be used to recruit people to an ideological cause. It can also be used to refute an ideological cause. That's what "free speech" is all about. Other than promoting a crime (which is prohibited), you get to say things that others object to, and they get to say things back. And most of us get to listen and ponder and make up our minds. The US Mail was a useful tool for recruiting, before the Internet. So is free association and the right to gather together to discuss and share our ideas. Should we allow our mail to be opened, and should we put cameras in our homes now, so no one can call a secret meeting and recruit people to Radical Islamic Fascism (which seems to be the only terrorism we're concerned about these days -- we are incredibly silly, sometimes). If Lieberman is successful in censoring the Internet, he will be part of an establishment that will then have all the power to decide what we get to hear and read. What he will have accomplished will have little to do with fighting terrorism and so much more to do with establishing a system that looks far too much like the rule of the pigs in Animal Farm.

Given what Lieberman has

Given what Lieberman has become, maybe it's a good thing Gore lost.

This attack on Internet

This attack on Internet content is nothing less than an attack on our Freedom of speech. First, the Neocons will take 'just a little bite' as an appetizer...then they will be all set to devour the whole meal...since their foot will already be in the door. Sen. Lieberman is a well-placed tool for the ultimate purpose of taking away the very essence of what makes America..America. It is a form of ' waging war by deception.' Wake up , people, and put a stop to this lie that they are protecting our freedom, while they are taking it away with a Lie, bite by bite. Lie-berman is well- named. First he is on one side ..then he is on another. I call him a wolf in sheep's clothing . Now he has shown his true colors for all to see.

The great danger here was

The great danger here was suggested by testimony before the Committee on HR1955 by a staff member of the Simon Wiesenthal Center who specifically identified the 911truth movement as an example of a domestic terrorist organization using the internet to foment terrorism. This is also a move by the right-wing to suppress sharing of information and evidence concerning the "official" explanation of 911 and who is actually responsible for it.

The scary thing is that

The scary thing is that Lieberman, who is now called McCAin's attack dog (but he actually looks more like that cartoon dog with the saggy jowls, Droopy) was the VP candidate in 2000. How did this aHole become chairman of anything? Can't Reid replace him?

This Sen.Lieberman is a tool

This Sen.Lieberman is a tool of the NeoCons and it should be obvious to any thinking person what the ultimate goal really is. It is nothing less than an attack on Free Speech. This whole so-called War on Terror was misnamed...it should be called the War of Terror originating right here in the USA.

Bush White House press

Bush White House press releases constitute a clear and present danger to the peace and tranquility of the United States of America. Bush White House press releases flood the channels of public communication with dissimulation, disinformation, and diversion.

Since we're talking tools,

Since we're talking tools, Lieberman is a tool: a tool of his spiritual ego. Kind of like tweezers.

Interesting that he's not

Interesting that he's not going after ultra-right wing AMERICAN terrorists. Not the abortion clinic bombers, not the radical political and religious groups right here. No, it's all Islamists who are bad.

Could SPAM be considered

Could SPAM be considered terrorist propaganda?? False Advertising?? Unsolicited Mail?? Predatory Lending?? FIAT MONEY of the BEAST POWER??!! The List goes on....

When is Reid going to do

When is Reid going to do something about Lieberzeller???

Something like a cross

Something like a cross between the House Unamerican Activities Commitee and the Committee of Public Safety -- Robespierre et al. And I do mean 'cross.'
.
.