By Raven | TruthAlliance.net | Dec. 10, 2007

House bill HR 1955 has received a considerable amount of attention this past month, especially on the Internet where numerous groups are calling it a “thought crimes” bill. TruthAlliance.net had the opportunity to sit down with one of the co-sponsors of this bill, Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) and voice some concerns about this type of legislation. Unlike most elected officials Congressman Perlmutter still makes himself available to his constituents and we applaud him for that.

The bill in question is HR 1955, which is entitled the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.” The language in this bill is extremely broad and subsequently can be used to prosecute American citizens for speech that would otherwise be protected under the first amendment.

Part of the reason this bill drew such an outcry, especially on the Internet is do to the presentation made by Mark Weitzman the Director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center Hate & Terrorism Task Force. During this presentation he attempted to lump together the organization Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth with Radical Islamic fundamentalist groups before the sub-committee convened by Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA).

That presentation foreboded the possible future steps that may be taken to rid the country of certain dissenting groups. It also showed how the legislation could be used not only on the 9/11 Truth community, but anti-war groups, and even Ron Paul supporters too.  All these groups advocate non-violence, but if one person who associates themselves with any of these groups says something violent, the whole group can be labeled as domestic terrorists.

Three terms jump out in the bill as having loose definitions that can be applied to almost any group and any circumstance.

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 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.

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.

The House of Representatives passed this bill with 404 votes in favor of it, an overwhelming majority. Two Congressmen who spoke out against this bill where Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Rep. Ron Paul. Ron Paul said it best December 5, 2007 on the House floor. “This legislation focuses the weight of the US government inward toward its own citizens under the guise of protecting us against “violent radicalization.”

After we talked to Rep. Perlmutter about this bill he understood our concerns and was sympathetic to them. He believed there had to be a violent act as a pretext, and also that there was a privacy clause built into the bill which protected civil liberties. A stipulation that he demanded before participating in the co-sponsorship of the bill. After hearing constituent arguments he was somewhat baffled that the bill failed to include these protections and insisted that he will go back and read the bill, verify our arguments, and if necessary rethink his position on the bill.

Dozens of bills go through Congress every week and a lot of them are over 1,000 pages each. Often bills get sections added and subtracted from them right up to the very day that they are to be voted on. It is an ineptitude that plagues Congress. In fact Congress isn’t even required to read all the bills before they vote on them. Even if they wanted to read them all it would probably be near impossible. This practice needs to change, Congress must read all the bills that they intend to vote on, or not vote on them until they do. The American people are extremely dissatisfied with the performance of Congress. Maybe if more Congressmen actually spent time listening to their constituents like Representative Perlmutter, they wouldn’t as a whole have a 14% approval rating.>

Besides the HR 1955 questions we managed to get in a few other with Congressmen Perlmutter regarding the war in Iraq, the Bush administration's contempt and the immigration and open border problem. At the end we gave the Congressmen 4 DVD's. They were: Terrorstorm, Endgame, Loose Change Final Cut, and America: Freedom to Fascism.

See the entire 15 minute session with Rep. Perlmutter below: