U.S. Anti-Terrorist Act
Free Speech and Assembly Act?
The 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act has wide reaching forfeiture provisions.
The Act utilizes the broad term (supporting organizations that
transcend boundaries). Any organization or group that advocates
support for a cause or organization within a U.S. jurisdiction,
or across a state line, or in another country, is considered by
U.S. Government to be transcending boundaries. Consequently, any
environmental group or organization is vulnerable to being
charged with supporting terrorist activity should any member of
an organization they supported--be charged by the U.S. or other
government, with having intimidated or coerced a civilian population;
or influenced the policy of a government.
U.S. Government can now seize the assets of innocent organizations
and/or members alleged to have supported an organization, group,
or person(s) committing a terrorist activity. Excessive government
property forfeiture provisions are tied to the 1996 Anti-Terrorist
act. U.S. Government can forfeit SOURCE ASSETS that supported
terrorist activity. So if a person for example uses income from
their business or bank account to support an organization or
persons the U.S. Government later alleges committed or supported
terrorist acts, the U.S. Government may seize the contributor's
business or bank account as a SOURCE ASSET. Keep in mind, intimidation
may qualify as a terrorist act. So if the press or government
has criminalized an organization, the presence of the organization's
members at a demonstration or other event may be enough for a
police agency to allege the members or their organization intimidated
a civilian population; or influenced the policy of a government
under 18USC International Terrorist Activities. Government may
now use the 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act to selectively eradicate any
group or person which is believed to be objectionable.
CONCERN: Police can charge lawful citizens who attend demonstrations
and other public events with affording support to demonstrators
whose activities may constitute Terrorist Activities under USC18
2991. Innocent attending demonstrators run the risk of being charged
as terrorists, then having to prove by their presence at a demonstration,
they were not supporting the illegal activities of the alleged
Lawful demonstrators may be convicted simply because they
did not think to leave an event where some demonstrators were
committing illegal acts. Broad provisions of the 1996. Anti-Terrorist
Act may eventually scare-off citizens from attending lawful demonstrations
and/or contributing money to progressive causes.
CONCERN: A corrupt government and/or its paid operatives,
may too easily cause the arrest of innocent demonstrators and/or
cause government forfeiture of their assets. Conviction of an
activist or organization is NOT necessary for government to
forfeit an owner's property. U.S. Government may civil forfeit
a citizen's assets using only a Preponderance of Evidence by showing
an owner's property was involved in a felony that would make it
subject to forfeiture. 200 felonies can now cause government forfeiture
Republican Congressman Henry Hyde got passed in Congress the
Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 HR 1658. The statue
of limitations, the time period police have to civilly forfeit
property, begin five years from the time police claim to have
learned an asset was made subject to forfeiture. Concern: Police
can claim that anytime in the future.
Corporate security and private intelligence companies now
work so closing with U.S. police agencies, they appear to merge.
Private security corporations by working closely with U.S. police
agencies are in a position to influence local and federal police
as to which political/environmental opponents should be arrested,
or have their assets forfeited.
Neither charged defendants, nor anyone else, can use the Freedom
of Information Act penetrate corporate information banks to learn
if a corporation illegally obtained or provided information to
a police agency. Increasingly, corporate informants work both
sides of the street when they get paid for providing police the
same information about, e.g., a political or environmental group.
It is a dangerous trend in the United States when police agencies
merge with corporate security forces, become perhaps an illegal
enterprise, to violate a person's Constitutional and civil rights.
Secret Witnesses, Secret Jurors, Secret Testimony, Hidden
Evidence: Once U.S. Government or police charge a person or organization
under 18USC 2991, International Terrorist Activity the U.S.
Government may use secret witnesses, secret jurors, secret testimony,
and other hidden evidence to convict a defendant and/or forfeit
their assets. All this secrecy can be invoked by U.S. Government
to protect alleged national security, an ongoing investigation,
undisclosed witnesses and jurors. The police agencies involved
in the investigation may get to share in the citizen's assets
after they are forfeited by the government. This is especially
dangerous since police routinely purchase testimony. Persons charged
under the 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act, may have difficulty defending
themselves even against the death penalty when they may not be
allowed to know the secret evidence against them, or cross-examine
government's secret witnesses. Such Star Chamber Courts do not
serve the interests of a free society. Had the 1996 Anti-Terrorist
Act been in effect during the days of COINTELPRO, 1960 through
the 1980's, many foundations and citizens to avoid risks such
as being charged as terrorists or losing their assets to forfeiture,
would have given contributions only to organizations that the
U.S. Government approved of, not to progressive organizations
or persons who would dare question or confront government policies
or attempt to legally stop corporate polluters.
COINTELPRO RED SQUADS are back. This time the squads have
in their arsenal the 1996 Ant-Terrorist Act and new property forfeiture
laws which they may use to eradicate their political, environmental
and human rights.